By Siraj Islam Mufti, Ph.D.
Not only in the West, but Muslims all around the world condemned the September 11 terrorist attacks as crimes against humanity. But Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister could not contain himself with just that, and went further by calling it as "a war against civilization." And the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, asserted rather brashly that Western civilization was superior to Islam and asked his fellow Europeans to conquer, and occidentalise this backward world "1400 years behind". Other European leaders felt embarrassed by this ill-mannered candor at a time when they were recruiting Muslim regimes for their war against Afghanistan.
Others, including U.S. President George W. Bush, invoked the medieval metaphor, "crusade." Bush recanted his statement, regretting its unintended historical connotations, but Muslims to this day recall the horrors of that event in history. And although the crusades were primarily directed against Muslims, more Christians suffered because of it as invading European Crusaders first attacked their fellow Christians in the Holy Land.
Pope John Paul recently apologized for the crusades committed in the name of Christianity.
Here, for educating Berlusconi (he could also pick any authoritative book of Islamic history [1]) I refer to a recent talk by Carly Fiorina, (2) the CEO of Hewlett Packard, where she pays such tribute to Islamic civilization, as it "was the greatest in the world." That "its military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known." And "this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention," and in proof cites its architecture, mathematics, medicine, astronomy, art and poetry. Further that "when nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them and kept them alive." Moreover, "although we are often unaware of our indebtedness to this other civilization, its gifts are very much a part of our heritage."
To support this claim, as one example she gave was that, "the technology industry would not exist without the contributions of Arab mathematicians." As for leadership, which this speech was about, she tells of "leaders like Suleiman the Magnificent" who "contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership…and perhaps we can learn a lesson from his example: it was a leadership based on meritocracy, not inheritance. It was leadership that harnessed the full capabilities of a very diverse population - that included Christianity, Islamic and Jewish traditions."
The fact is that civilizations do not develop in isolation, and in the course of history, several civilizations have always existed side by side. Different civilizations have their distinct characteristics tied to a historic context such that they represent a diversity with different varieties of humankind, which exist because of the freedom that God has bestowed on His human creation. And there is a constant interaction between peoples across contemporaneous civilizations with a fertile exchange of ideas and viewpoints. Thus they learn from each other and grow in the process by challenging, inspiring and stimulating each other. Such has been the case with civilizations of the past and present.
But utterances by ex-colonialists reflecting 19th century imperialist thought continue to extol they carried the burden to "civilize" the non-white world, which led to that tyranny known as colonialization - the racist dehumanization of humankind, grabbing lands through cunning deceit, and divide and rule cum gun-powder diplomacy, thereby enslaving "others" - all, in order to exploit for their selfish ends. Adolph Hitler was the product of this mentality, arrogating to the German race alone the right to dominate others and telling them what to do and what not to do. It led to the clash and consequent demise of both Nazi Germany and non-German colonialist civilizations before and during World War II.
Subsequently, there was the rise of the Marxist civilization in the Soviet Union (USSR), promising a classless society through abolition of capitalism and placing all means of production at the disposal of the community. Although communist experimentation looked attractive to the exploited proletariat worldwide, it, in the process, gagged dissent and all democratic channels of expression. That evil was compounded by its ferocious anti-religiosity, therefore, never being able to conquer the hearts and minds of Muslim people, even within its own dominions.
It was hoped that the demise of the USSR and consequential end of the Cold War would be a harbinger of world peace by bringing an end to the "clash," but no sooner had it ended than some Western intellectuals and policymakers started looking for new enemies where there were none. A former U.S. State department employee, Francis Fukuyama immediately proclaimed that the collapse of communism meant the triumph of Western capitalist-liberal societies and that this signified the end of historical process. (3) Still, he was not sure whether the attainment of political and economic liberty would lead to a stable society or slide it into the chaos and bloodshed of history. In other works that followed in 1995 (4) and 1999 (5), Fukuyama was anxious concerning the immorality of the social order and its implications for social economy. The civic society, according to him, was run by "social capital" which comes from "religion and culture and social mores handed down from one generation to another."
Still he thought, "the days of Islam's cultural conquests are over." That Islam "can win back lapsed adherents, but has no resonance for young people in Berlin, Tokyo or Moscow, and while nearly a billion people are culturally Islamic - one-fifth of the world's population - they cannot challenge liberal democracy on its own territory on the level of ideas." This despite acknowledging that it is "true that Islam constitutes a systematic and coherent ideology" and that it has "potentially universal" appeal.
Notwithstanding this, however, Harvard University professor Samuel Huntington warned that the war to dominate the world was not over and predicted that future wars would be fought between civilizations, and not nations. Then he put forward his now classic, although controversial, theory of an inevitable clash between the Western and Islamic -Chinese civilizations. (6) He stated that the Islamic civilization extending from Morocco to Indonesia lacked a core state, but had several active states, and that its challenge stemmed from its demographic dynamism with an immense youth bulge in most Muslim countries. Then invoking sociologists and historians, he claimed that this youth bulge spelled trouble for the future of West. What in reality worried him was the growing bulge of the aging population in the West.
Huntington should have rather listened to the likes of Fukuyama and spent time on addressing the socially and morally subversive crisis that is taking place within Western civilization. Instead, he preferred to instigate a totally unjust and unjustifiable war against Islamic civilization. Indeed, the fractures and fault lines within Western civilization are completely of its own creation; Islam has nothing to do with it. Except, of course, the Islamic human responsibility of reaching out to others, including Western neighbors and offering a helping hand by sharing sincere thoughts about addressing and redressing the prevalent ailments of humanity.
But Muslims have no ambitions of entangling in a clash with the West. If anything, they are concerned about setting their own house in order. They have found out that their governments, once put in place by ex-colonialists, and now maintained in their status quo by the U.S., are utterly ineffective, corrupt and authoritarian. And once in power, they want to stay in power, no matter what, and any elections held are fictitious and rigged. They also ruthlessly repress any dissent and are the worst violators of human rights. Thus, Muslim masses are increasingly alienated from their own governments and they want a change for the better that also conforms to their Islamic heritage and its specific ideals.
The problem is that U.S. administrations have aligned themselves with these oppressive autocratic regimes that justify repression of all opposition as a defense against "fundamentalism" or "extremism." Thus, the U.S. not only condones, but also is protective of them. It is precisely the authoritarianism of these regimes that fuels extremism. This situation, therefore, is not tenable and it would be in the interest of the U.S., as well as peace and stability in the world, if it would rather become an agent of change. It will also be in consonance with the fundamental values of the American people: freedom, justice, equality and democracy. The U.S. also needs to realize that its larger interests lie, not with the narrow selfishness of Zionists and special interest groups who control its foreign policy, but with befriending, rather than alienating, 1.2 billion Muslims inhabiting strategically important and resource-rich countries, and who are destined to exert influence in any emerging world order. Thus, the U.S. must dialog with genuine Islamic leaders who stand for change through peaceful democratic means. All they are asking is a sincere understanding of, and coexistence with Muslims, with mutual respect. Otherwise, it could lead to the generation of more and more anti-American feelings as Muslim frustration grows and the U.S. is seen as the actual power backing repression of legitimate demands.
Also, Muslims and Islamic leaders must look at the West differently. If a "clash" was imposed on the Muslim world, it is also because of their fault from a lack of communication. Islamic leaders should frequently interact with various Western, especially U.S., leaders, exchanging ideas, apprizing them that their objectives are for the good of humankind, and reassuring them that they are not after their legitimate interests in Muslim lands. Thus they should not look at the West as one monolithic conglomerate opposed to Muslims per se; that would contradict the Islamic understanding of innate goodness that Divine Providence has imparted to all humans. There are differences among Western governments and within government establishments as well. And there is also a wide disconnect between the establishment and a particular society, as evidenced by prevalent cynicism and apathy. For example, only about 30% of eligible American voters care to vote in elections.
Above all, it is Muslim's Islamic duty to let others know about the religion: and at this critical juncture, it will also determine the future course of events not only for them but also for the world. If there is misinformation about Islam and Muslims, it is also because they have not attended to their responsibility of outreaching (da'wa) to others to tell them of the transcendental grandeur, inherent balance and beauty of reason in Islam. Surprisingly, the U.S. tragedy and the war in Afghanistan have exited a tremendous curiosity of the common people about them in the West, and especially in the U.S., providing great opportunities to connect with them. Therefore, Islamic leaders should take up their responsibility to awaken the Muslim masses to foster a relevant understanding of Islam so that they could enlighten others, and be constantly engaged in it, without any letup and respite. They should form alliances and coalitions with people across all faiths - Christians and Jews in particular, people of conscience in general, and other grassroots organizations.
The role of American Muslims is crucial in this dialog. Knowing and understanding both the Muslim world and the U.S., they could serve as a bridgehead between both. According to Jamal Barzinji (7) of the American Muslim Council (AMC), although the American Muslim community at seven million "represents only about 2.5% of the total American population, …that is enough of a political force to make a major difference, a major contribution to the entire Muslim world." And now they have established more firmly their Muslim identity and "brought respect and acceptance into the general population at all levels, from the President, to the Congress, to the religious community, and to a certain extent, to media as well."
Since many problems within the Muslim world ensue from current U.S. foreign policies, American Muslims, therefore, must redouble their efforts in forming alliances and coalitions with compatriots who would like to see foreign policy changed, so that it serves in equity and fairness Muslims throughout the world, rather than being controlled by racist Zionists, and the media owned by them. The American masses are keen to know more about Islam and Muslims. Therefore, each and every American Muslim must be galvanized into action to present a true picture of Islam and sincerely exhibit it in his/her personal conduct. They should know that the Islamic mission set for them by the Creator and Lord of the universe is: "amr bil maruf wa nahi anil munkar" (The Qur'an, Al Imran 3:110). Or, to enhance and further all that is good, not only for Muslims but also for all of humankind, as well as to negate and eliminate all that is harmful to humankind. Therefore, Muslims should reach out to others to work for establishing a moral society in the U.S., and raise a unified voice with them for the causes of justice, virtue and the good of humanity.
Wisdom from a Plumber
By Abdul-Lateef Abdullah
These days, you never can tell where wisdom will come from. Allah is constantly humbling us by manifesting truth in all sorts of ways and from all types of people. A few days ago, I was on the phone with my teacher in New Jersey, and I was asking him what the mood was like in the U.S. (I am currently living in Malaysia, but am from the U.S.). He then proceeded to tell me that he had an interesting conversation with his plumber that day. The plumber? What bit of insight into world events could a plumber from New Jersey have, I thought. The plumber, from small-town USA driving his pick-up truck and proudly displaying the Stars and Stripes bandanna on his head, came up with an important observation about his country. He said, "The laws of this country [U.S.] have made us weak. Whenever we have a problem, our first reaction is to call our lawyer or someone else to take away our problems for us. This has made us weak. We have forgotten how to take care of our own business."
My teacher was in complete agreement with him. In fact, in his eleven years of living in the U.S., he has frequently commented on this very same thing. For him, while growing up outside the U.S., everything about America was cowboys and Indians and rugged individualism. The U.S. represented strength, bravery and toughness. Now, through his experiences there, he sees a society of illness and weakness, buried under materialism, violence, and greed. With the tragedy of the September 11 attacks, there can be no denying that the illusion of immunity from external aggression was dealt a major blow to the collective conscious of America, and in effect, the psyche of the American public and the ability to cope with the reality of vulnerability.
The plumber's statements alluded to a nation, and people, that once prided itself on its toughness, self-reliance, and a pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps outlook on life driven by the Protestant work ethic. Too much material success, too many lawyers and psychiatrists, and too many service industries doing everything for everyone, however, has America losing its edge, and essentially, its "American-ness."
If you carefully observe the way America once was, and where contemporary American culture is now heading, you can clearly see the signs. The nature, not just the statistics, of social ills in America today are pointing to problems that run deep, and stem from a loss of "soulfulness". Go to your local bookstore or turn on Oprah, and almost daily you will see some show or read some article about a social or psychological malaise affecting some man, woman, child or group. Emotionally, people are hurting, confused, and depressed and many are choosing to shun traditional remedies for "alternative" or more "eastern" approaches to their problems.
Essentially, America is drowning and is running out of ideas on how to save itself. Take schools and education for example. Now, in the U.S., children essentially run the schools. Teachers everywhere, particularly in the inner-city schools, are scared of their students. They find it nearly impossible to control them, let alone - God forbid - discipline them. Parents today are more prone to back their children in contentious teacher-student situations, no matter what the child does to earn the teacher's displeasure, than to defend the teacher. No more are the days when parents and teachers formed a united front to teach and enforce respect and correct behavior of children. Now, the teachers are under attack and the students - children - are leading the assault. This is an example of the backwardness in societies that Rasulullah (the Prophet Mohammad, SAW) warned us about as we approach the end of time.
The "weakening" of America - as put by the plumber - is also being facilitated by the never-ending lawsuits in which the society is literally drowning. In famous cases - like the woman who won two million dollars from McDonald's because she spilled hot coffee on herself while driving - is just an example of how the extreme "litigiousness" of American society is manufacturing greed to the point where people become fixated on suing over every little thing in the hope of making a quick buck. As a summer intern in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware a few years back, I can assure you that people in my country sue over just about anything! Judges are frequently forced to throw cases out of court due to superfluous lawsuits brought about by people trying to capitalize on the slightest misfortune.
This mentality of "whatever wrong is done to me, I am owed something" - which in most cases translates into large sums of money - has added a great deal to the psychological fragility of America. It is also another indicator of an increasingly atheistic worldview, one in which there is little belief that everything happens to us for a reason - even if that thing is as mundane as spilling hot coffee on ourselves. Such a mentality represents a major step backward for those who still believe in the importance of meeting responsibilities before being granted rights and privileges. American culture today, however, teaches the opposite - that we should demand our rights regardless as to whether or not we meet our responsibilities. We have the right to sue for huge sums of money if we act like fools and put scalding hot coffee between our legs, even though common sense would teach us that we have a responsibility to ourselves not to do it because it is physically dangerous.
These developments, which have evolved primarily over the past half century, have been heavily influenced by Western psychology - a psychology that is atheistic, materialistic, and void of a soul or spirit. This is in great contrast to religion and the concept of spirituality, which views the human being as the complex meeting point of mental, physical and spiritual faculties. The Western psychological schools of thought and their ranks of foot soldiers have greatly influenced Western society through the systematic application of God-less psychology. With their widespread application and influence on mainstream culture, psychological schools such as Freud's, admittedly do not address aspects of the human being such as the soul, because such concepts are outside of the measurable, positivist scientific scope. In fact, Freud and his followers have explained religion as nothing more than the "universal obsessional neurosis (Ahmed, 2001)."
An example of this from my time spent at the Taqwa Gayong (Islamic) Academy in New Jersey is of one particular teenage Muslim boy. His parents, in response to their inability to control his behavior, which included drug use, alcohol use, and free sex, decided to send him to a psychiatrist out of desperation. After "treating" the boy several times, the psychiatrist, however, far from helping the boy understand why he needed to be more obedient and respectful to his parents so as to help mend the family according to its correct structure, sided with the boy and told the parents that their requiring him to pray five times a day was borderline abusive and excessive, and that they should let him have more freedom to do what he wants. Although only an example, this is how people in America - children more than anyone else - are becoming stripped of their humanness. They are being spoon-fed the notion that they need to indulge every urge, want, and desire, otherwise, they will not be happy. Ironically enough, the opposite effect has taken hold and its proof is in the pudding. As of 1998, one in five American adults was considered to have suffered from some sort of diagnosable mental disorder. In addition, 4 of the 10 leading causes of disability in the U.S. and other developed countries are mental disorders - major depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (National Institute of Mental Health, 1998).
The psychic deterioration of America is thus being facilitated through the use of modern day psychology and exaggerated notions of mental illness to make people dependent on everything and everyone but God and themselves. This is not to say that modern psychology has not contributed anything positive toward understanding human behavior, but because of its atheistic roots and assumptions, it often works against religion and the critical role of spirituality in the development of man. Thus, it essentially goes against our very nature as human beings. As a result, religion has been reduced to an "extracurricular activity," rather than a way of life. Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike who are avid practitioners of their faiths often get strange looks and clichéd labels such as "fundamentalists" if they speak publicly about religion or even use the word "God" in a professional context.
Muslims the world over who are experiencing more Western culture in their daily lives have to guard against the dangers of "dependency culture". This is one of the shaytanic (devilish) traps of unbridled materialism and Western-style democracy, in that it creates a way of life that encourages the individual to do less for himself, to look away from himself, to complain when he does not get his way, to blame others for his problems, and to shy away from critiquing the "man in the mirror". As a result, we start to believe that we are "owed" things, or that certain luxuries and status are due to us, regardless of whether or not we are meeting our responsibilities, are grateful to Allah for what we have, and are busy with the ongoing work of self-improvement and reflection.
Today, whether in Western countries or in other parts of the world, we are seeing larger numbers of Muslims who, although they may be religious insofar as their ibadat (worship) is concerned, are getting sucked into the traps of dependency culture. Dependency culture teaches us to demand our rights before we take care of our responsibilities; to demand handouts on account of being "oppressed"; and to demand what is "due to us". This is precisely how God is being replaced. This is how Western cultural elites have been able to systematic remove God and religion from everyday life with atheistic and materialist psychology - by making us dependent on things and people rather than Allah. On the contrary, however, as Muslims we must heed Allah in the Qur'an when he says, "Nay, seek (Allah's) help with patient perseverance and prayer: It is indeed hard, except to those who bring a lowly spirit (2:45)." Furthermore, the Prophet (SAW) spoke on this matter when he said, "Wisdom and power follow endurance and patience" (reported by Abu Sayeed al-Khodri).
Looking back at our history, we can see that in his life, Rasulullah (SAW) never asked anybody for anything. He always relied on Allah. He did not take positions in Makkan society when they were offered to him, he did not take concessions from their rulers, he certainly did not demand his rights from anybody, and he never complained to any human being about his lot or situation. Even after being run out of the city of Taif by children who had bloodied and humiliated him, what did he do? He complained - to Allah - of his weakness, and the lack of support and humiliation he was made to receive (Salahi, 1995).
From my own personal perspective, the drive toward self-perfection through practice of the deen (religion) of Allah, the jihad al-akbar (the greater struggle), can be very difficult at times. The idea that everything comes to us from Allah, and that we have to train and condition ourselves to understand this and be grateful for whatever Allah sends us, is truly a struggle to put into practice. At every moment we have to fight the urge to complain about this, complain about that, demand to know why this happened or why that happened, blame our misfortunes on others, and just lie down and give in to our lower selves. We, however, have to differentiate ourselves through quiet determination and resignation that Allah is always in charge. Naturally, this includes improving the world around us, standing up to oppression and tyranny, and doing our best to correct falsehood because it is our duty to as khalifahs. It is part of our collective responsibility, and must be conducted correctly and according to Divine Law.
Ultimately, obeying Allah is about self-perfection and self-love. If we love ourselves, we will want to perfect ourselves and will work to do so. If we hate ourselves, we will work to destroy ourselves by going against Allah's commands, for as we already know, they exist for our benefit and success. Therefore, He has expressly forbidden those things that will destroy us, so that we can avoid them, love ourselves, and enjoy the ultimate success. Thus, the Western formula of looking to others - to do things for us and as the source of our problems - is one of self-destruction.
People everywhere today are being conditioned to look outside of themselves first to solve their problems, and as a result they are becoming more and more incapable of keeping their own houses in order. It is this formula that is creating societies replete with self-hatred and weakness, which is what the plumber from New Jersey so poignantly picked up on. The signs are there - social ills growing out of control. This is surely the path to self-destruction first, and societal destruction second. As Muslims who understand this, we must avoid making these same mistakes and help others by bringing them into the light of Allah's grace and formula for ultimate success, as the results of not doing so could be disastrous for all of humanity.
Despite the denials, this war is rooted in religion
JONATHAN CLARK
The conflict was foreshadowed by the battles of the 16th and 17th centuries This is not a war of religion. All Western leaders (with the possible exception of the Italian Prime Minister) say so, and the mainstreams of Islam, Judaism and Christianity teach forgiveness and peace. Westerners cite Muslim moderates.
Why, then, insist on an obvious half-truth? We cling to it because the al-Qaeda network reveals some key fissures of Western liberalism: that religion belongs to the realm of private opinion, or represents outdated superstition, or both.
We all knew there were problems with multiculturalism. In Britain, the Left thought the plural society could be made to work by more social services and democratic participation, the Right by more patriotism and family cohesion. How historically shallow these solutions were, Islam unexpectedly shows. Unintentionally, Osama bin Laden reminds Post-Modern Britons that theirs is an indelibly Christian country rather than an ahistorical “community of communities”.
Yet liberal orthodoxy is still “in denial”. Secular pluralism is consistently imposed from Northern Ireland to the Balkans, yet wars of religion have not faded away in the modern world: politicians merely insist on describing them in other terms and applying other remedies. The poor success of these attempts is held to show that the parties to the conflict have not yet grown up. Meanwhile, religious minorities commonly seek to transform their states from within, often in alliance with co-religionists abroad.
More have recently died in conflicts among Muslims than in conflicts between Muslims and Christians, yet Christians have historically participated. However much slaughter was caused since 1789 by secular ideologies, the identification of an enemy as belonging to the wrong race or class was as nothing compared to the perception, widespread in 16th-century Europe, that one’s opponents were predestined to eternal damnation. This tenet caused endless bloodshed.
Queen Elizabeth I’s ministers urged Europe that English Catholics were being executed for their politics, not their religion; but to Rome these two things were so inseparable that Campion, Fawkes and others were revered by their co-religionists as martyrs, not denounced as traitors. Whether young Muslims holding British passports who leave to fight for al-Qaeda fall into a similar category is the sort of problem Britain has seldom faced since; but where liberals shy away from the issue, British Muslims answered it in an opinion poll last weekend, 68 per cent putting their religion first, 14 per cent their country.
We have been here before; and it was intolerant 17th-century Europe, not the liberal Enlightenment that followed, which devised solutions to the problems the Reformation unleashed. Most, including partition (the formula that ended the disastrous Thirty Years’ War in 1648) and “toleration” (the supremacy of one Church and the exclusion from political power of dissenters), offend the modern conscience. Others seem worse, including the suppression of religious minorities and forced conversion. But they were devised by practical statesmen as well informed in theology as ours are in economics. The methods varied from country to country, and determined their subsequent enjoyment of personal liberty.
These formulae for peace were eventually forgotten or dismantled; but religious conflict evolved rather than disappeared. In Christianity as well as Islam, people orthodox in their theology, and politically moderate, can be mobilised for political action by heterodox minorities of extremists using political language (often natural rights based) that sounds plausible to the middle ground. This should not seem strange to Americans, since it is in a nutshell the story of 1776.
The US separated Church and State in 1787 to prevent such conflict, but a threat averted is not a problem understood. Where modern Americans thought they lived in a world made safe for consumerism by being secularised, others overseas interpreted American public culture differently: not self-evident secularity finally acknowledged, but as religion (in this case, Islam) negated, as the Devil. To the religious mind, all things express a religious position, secularism included.
Popular responses show a similar lack of perception. Americans denounce the suicide highjackers as “cowards” or “deranged” (rather than intelligent, courageous religious zealots) and presume that worldwide anti-Americanism is fed by jealousy of Americans’ material wealth (rather than by pietistic rejections of the values which that wealth projects).
Yet liberal, secular societies have liberal, secular equivalents of the idea that those dying in a jihad at once reach paradise: not until Muslim teaching on this point changes, and we respond to religious war better than to call it terrorism, will the problem be solved. If it took moderate Catholics and Calvinists decades to redefine their political theologies, however, the prospects for Islam doing so soon may be poor.
Meanwhile, many 17th-century remedies are being reinvented under the pressure of circumstance. It would still seem unacceptable to say that a Christian society could not tolerate a Muslim minority within it, although many Roman Catholic and Protestant states in Europe were historically forced to conclude that minorities of the other denomination were unacceptably subversive. If al-Qaeda found means to detonate nuclear devices, all the techniques of the 17th century would be seen again. But because our imperfect past has been largely forgotten, these lessons are unlikely to be learnt until it is too late.
The author is the Hall Professor of History at the University of Kansas