I always like to post different perspectives on issues, especially when they are voices which are seldom promoted by the mainstream media.

I found this interview with Hamza Yusuf interesting:

Hamza Yusuf Hanson was born in Washington State and raised in northern California. After exploring religion at an early age, he entered Islam at 18 and set out to study in England, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Algeria, and finally West Africa. He became fluent in the Arabic language and then began his studies of the traditional Islamic sciences under the tutelage of some of the greatest Muslim scholars of our age.

After a sojourn of ten years abroad, Hamza Yusuf returned to the U.S. and took degrees in Nursing and Religious Studies. In 1996, he co-founded the Zaytuna Institute in order to teach the traditional sciences of Islam to people in the West. He serves as the director of the Institute and has translated several texts from Arabic for the Institute's curriculum.

He is recognized today as one of the most influential voices for Islam in the West and has advised several world leaders including the President of the United States and the head of the Arab League. Hamza Yusuf resides in northern California with his wife and children.

The entire interview is interesting, however if you haven't got time to watch it all I would suggest you at least watch the last video in which there is a discussion regarding Islam and other religions.

Today is Sunday - A day of rest and a day of peace.  So no replies to comments today. 

What I will post are two articles displaying interfaith dialogue and how it promotes peace.  Peace to all.

Have a peaceful Sunday,
Chezz

Muslims, Christians Discuss Faith and Reason in Rome

1^st May 2008

VATICAN CITY (Zenit) - Benedict XVI was pleased to see representatives of Catholicism and Islam considering faith and reason in their respective creeds.

A statement from the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Tehran-based Center for Interreligious Dialogue of the Islamic Culture and Relations Organization affirmed the Pope's "great satisfaction" when he received representatives from their groups after the general audience today.

At the end of the meeting the participants agreed that faith and reason are both gifts of God to mankind.

They affirmed that faith and reason do not contradict each other, and that though faith might in some cases be above reason, it is never against it.

"Faith and reason are intrinsically nonviolent," the participants affirmed. "Neither reason nor faith should be used for violence; unfortunately, both of them have been sometimes misused to perpetrate violence. In any case, these events cannot question either reason or faith."

Both sides agreed to cooperate in promoting genuine religiosity, in particular spirituality, to encourage respect for symbols considered to be sacred and to promote moral values.

The participants concluded that Christians and Muslims should go beyond tolerance, accepting differences, while remaining aware of commonalities and thanking God for them. "They are called to mutual respect, thereby condemning derision of religious beliefs," the concluding statement affirmed.

It added: "Generalization should be avoided when speaking of religions. Differences of confessions within Christianity and Islam [and] diversity of historical contexts are important factors to be considered.

"Religious traditions cannot be judged on the basis of a single verse or a passage present in their respective holy books. A holistic vision as well as an adequate hermeneutical method is necessary for a fair understanding of them."

The participants expressed their satisfaction with the level of the presentations and the debates, the concluding statement noted, as well as the open and friendly atmosphere during the colloquium.

 

 

Interfaith dialogue may usher in new era

3^rd May 2008

Muslims, Christians and Jews in America already share a commitment to interfaith work characterized over the years as friendly and respectful with tangible results.

For me, this was best demonstrated during the first few days after the Sept. 11 attacks. Two nights after the tragedy, a lone gunman fired at worshippers leaving the Idriss Mosque near Northgate. Mercifully, nobody was hurt.

The next morning, the shooting was a top national news story — ours was one of the first mosques attacked after Sept. 11.

I arrived at the mosque around 6:30 a.m. to speak to the media. Shortly after 7 a.m., the first of many neighbors and citizens began to arrive with flowers, cards and offers to help secure our place of prayer.

Many of these volunteers were from the local interfaith community. They showed up in force offering to guard the mosque. People from the Church Council of Seattle and the interfaith community wound up standing guard day and night. They camped on our doorstep for the next three weeks to protect the city's largest mosque.

We had, over the years, shared coffee and discussions on religion with many of these faith-loving people. But those three weeks in 2001 ushered in a new chapter for our communities.

In the months that followed, we began to feel special trust in our brethren based on action, not just on words. We discovered that risking one's life for another's safety was a shared belief among faiths.

In early Islamic history, Prophet Muhammad drew up a pluralistic constitution that spelled out the duties of Muslims and people of other faiths in the city of Madinah (near Mecca). The people were to protect each other from threats to their security, uphold moral conduct and deal with each other fairly.

Thereafter, tolerance became the rule for non-Muslims living in Islamic lands. Churches and synagogues were protected by Muslims; non-Muslims were free to practice their own faiths.

I am proud the Seattle area interfaith community came together in those uncertain times; nearly seven years later we are a stronger, more trusting and more peaceful community.

Today, our local mosques are recognized religious institutions, and they've become venues for dialogue among all faiths.

By engaging in interfaith dialogue, world religious leaders have the power to usher in a new era of religious cooperation and understanding. Protecting the right of religious freedom and understanding our differences is precious, because our most universal quality is diversity.

Over time, such interfaith efforts carry us toward the day of peaceful brotherhood and sisterhood among all God's children.

Imagine a world in which the Children of Abraham were reunited.  It would have to be a much nicer and safer place than what it is at the moment.  All of the world’s problems would not be solved, but we would be well on the way.

 

Regrettably we have a long way to go before this will happen.  It could happen; there is no doubt about it.  Unfortunately we have too many misguided people in the world at the moment who seem to believe fighting is the complete answer to peace. Others seem to believe another solution is to alienate people and restrict their freedoms. To me there seems to be a lot of counter productive solutions to peace.

 

Here is an example and this is from people who claim that their religion is one of love and they make claims such as these in regards to what a real Christian is:

"They truly follow the tenets of Jesus. Things like "love your neighbor", "pray for them that despise you and say all manner of evil against you", "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", "if someone slaps you on the left cheek, turn your right cheek to him, also" and "if someone takes your cloak, give to him your tunic, also". Those are Jesus' words, and that is a religion full of love for your fellow man."

Currently here at Vox (thanks to paikea for highlighting this and posting a very interesting article titled: Muslim True/False) there is a petition being promoted to put forward a proposed US Constitutional Amendment.  This amendment would include that: 

 

“The preaching of Islam in Mosques, Schools, and other venues is prohibited. The subject of Islam may be taught in a post high school academic environment provided that instruction include discussion of Islam’s history of violence, conquest, and its ongoing war on democratic and other non-Islamic values.”

 

Yes it does seem rather harsh.

 

The proposal also states:

“Whereas; the United States of America was founded on the ideals of individual rights, including the individual right to practice one’s religion of choice, or no religion, and that there would be no compulsion of religion, nor state sanctioned religion, nor a ‘religious test’ for participation in the body politic;

Whereas; Islam includes a complete political and social structure, encompassed by its religious law, Sharia, that supercedes any civil law and that Islam mandates that no secular or democratic institutions are to be superior to Islamic law;”

From what I can gather about the United States the first paragraph is correct, unless you listen to some of the people from America’s Religious Right and then it seems they would dearly love to change this paragraph.  We have all heard about the pillars of the 10 Commandments being set up in public areas on American soil and the big kerfufel that it has caused.  If there is no state sanctioned religion, then there should not be the establishment of such a practice.   But listen further to a statement from someone who stated they would sign this petition, but had doubts of its effectiveness due to the wording of the petition:

“I think a better possibility to enact an Amendment to the Constitution declaring America a nation with a Judeo-Christian heritage without establishing any particular Jewish sect (Orthodox, Conservative or ) or Christian Denomination (Variations of Protestantism, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox etc.) as a State religion.  This would simultaneously deal with Secular Humanism war on Christianity and radical Islam.”

Now I could be totally wrong, but this statement doesn’t exactly match up with the statement:

“Whereas; the United States of America was founded on the ideals of individual rights, including the individual right to practice one’s religion of choice, or no religion, and that there would be no compulsion of religion, nor state sanctioned religion, nor a ‘religious test’ for participation in the body politic”

Although the comment doesn’t say there should be an official state religion, it does indicate there is intent to restrict freedom of religion and non-religion.   Let’s face it if it was possible, the Religious Right would declare the US a Christian nation in an instant if it had the power. 

This brings me to the next paragraph I included above,

Whereas; Islam includes a complete political and social structure, encompassed by its religious law, Sharia, that supercedes any civil law and that Islam mandates that no secular or democratic institutions are to be superior to Islamic law;”

This may or may not be the case in regards to Islam, however when it come to the Religious Right in the US, what sort of laws would we expect to see in the US.  The answer is simple we would see strict laws based on their version of Christianity.  To illustrate my point I only need to draw your attention to an article such as this, “God’s Choice for President”.  So who would the Religious Right’s God choose to be the next US President, well naturally McCain and why would God do such a thing, only two factors come to mind apparently, the issue of abortion and gay rights – yes that is it, I kid you not!  It seems God is not concerned about social justice issues, healthcare, poverty, the environment, racial harmony, equal rights and the endless list of things I thought were major concerns to a “Christian” God.

The Religious Right also seems to need to make up its mind.  I have noticed that when it suits, Christianity is described as a religion of peace and then they will do a back flip and bash the more socially conscious Christians over the head with their Bibles and say, "Christianity is not a religion of peace, because Jesus didn’t come to bring peace," and they will then go on and quote the following Bible passage:

“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39)

It is an interesting passage.  I actually like this passage, for me it means Jesus came here to shake the people up and get them thinking and get them out of their selfish and corrupt ways.  The church at the time needed a good kick in the pants. The people needed to start doing good work to help others and to become more loving and compassionate.  That at least is partly the meaning of the passage if it is read in conjunction with the other messages Jesus conveyed throughout the NT.  To me the sword is not to be taken literally.  However, I have heard Christians use that “sword” to defend the right to carry a gun, go to war, use violence, justify capital punishment, and a host of other violent acts. 

It is interesting how Islam is always portrayed as being spread by the sword, and yet here we have a quote in the Christian Bible and it is Jesus who is carrying a sword.  So it actually makes sense that when this passage is taken literally it has been used to spread the religion of Christianity throughout the world.  At present Islam is conveniently portrayed by Christians as being spread by the sword, and by making that claim they are inferring that Christianity has always been spread peacefully - I guess by some gentle process of osmosis.  But this is not true, the correct history of the world indicates otherwise.   Christianity has been spread throughout the world by the sword, by the gun, by oppressive tactics and  by an endless array of violent actions. In short, Christianity was spread by empire building throughout the world. 

I can now refer back to this quote mentioned earlier,

“I think a better possibility to enact an Amendment to the Constitution declaring America a nation with a Judeo-Christian heritage ............. ..... ....... ......"

There is an obvious flaw in this statement, an obvious omission.   Who were the people here before  the Judeo-Christian heritage was forced upon them?  Of course it was the Native Americans, who had their own heritage and their own beliefs systems. Were the Native Americans treated well by their Judeo-Christian conquerors?  No, in the main history also proves this to be incorrect.  

I am sure that if the Jews, the Moors, the “witches” and the “sodomites” could have put together a petition outlawing Christianity during the Spanish Inquisition they would have (So there is no bias here are two references one a Jewish perspective another a Catholic perspective).  I have heard modern day Orthodox Jews speaking of Christianity with utter disdain, and if you watch the video, “The Hidden Story of Jesus” which I have included below, you will actually witness how much disdain they have for Christianity and the wrongs they feel Christianity has done to them.

More from the proposal, “Whereas; Islam preaches that it and it alone is the true religion”

Of course no other religion has EVER proclaimed such an audacious statement has it.  I have been told many times that Christianity is the one true religion, and not only the Religious Right makes that claim.  In fact the scripture I quoted above from Matthew essentially says that Jesus is the ONLY way, and if you deviate away from Jesus then your life will be lost.  They are powerful words, powerful enough to make parents scared that their children's lives will be lost if they deviate away from the path, and that kind of "terror" can make people do terrible things to other people if they believe another is leading their child astray. It explains why so many Christian parents are devastated to find out their child is gay, for they believe their child is forever forsaken.

I would say that the majority of people belonging to all religions will make similar claims in regards to their religion being the one true way.  It stands to reason; otherwise they wouldn’t practice the religion.  But it shouldn't mean we shouldn't be able to get along.

Now for me the past is the past.  Terrible things have been done throughout history in the name of religion and also in the name of various political ideologies.  I have only brought up the past because some seem to like to bring up the past as a weapon against various religions, and my point is to say that no religion has an innocent past.  What matters to me is the present and the future, so I would love to move on.

This is my opinion for what it is worth.  I believe the Muslims who are being violent and intolerant in the name of Islam are misguided, as were the Christians/Jews/Hindus and other belief systems of the past who were violent and as are the Christians/Jews/Hindus and other belief systems who are violent or intolerant in the present.

This now brings me to the title of this post and that is, "Reuniting the Children of Abraham". This documentary is an interesting look at how it is possible to cross the barriers which impede peace on a personal level.  Petitions aimed at oppressing a whole people are not the answer to achieve peace in a country; projects such as these which aim to break down personal barriers to peace are the answer.  It is difficult to wage war against a friend or some one you know and respect.

“Abraham, of the Old Testament, was the founding patriarch of a new, monotheistic faith, which included Jews and later Christians and Muslims.  One of his two sons is historically tied to the founding of Judaism, the other to the founding of Islam.

The Children of Abraham Project, which is an effort by individuals and interfaith organizations in the Detroit Metro area, to educate Jews, Christians and Muslims as to their common ancestry, and encourages them to work together for tolerance, peace and civic betterment.  The process involves watching a play in which teenage actors, some who helped write the play, act out scenes from the Biblical story.  This is interspersed with contemporary accounts of religious and ethnic prejudice based on personal recollections.  The play has allowed audiences to speak freely about their fears and prejudices and to walk in another's shoes. 

The Project is a powerful experience that gives hope to the idea of these three religions being able to find their common heritage as a reason for mutual religious respect and spiritual healing in the future.”

 

.

.

.

Another interesting documentary is The Hidden Story of Jesus.  What really struck me about this documentary was by taking Jesus as an example; it was possible to see how much most of the religions have in common.  I believe looking for what we have in common, instead of looking at our differences; will in fact help us to become more closely connected as a society, and more accepting of our differences.

This is not a documentary for Christians to be afraid of, as I do not believe it would diminish your faith in anyway. 

For me personally it actually enhanced my faith in humanity.

 

 

 

 

Over the past year since I have been at Vox, I have had some fantastic dialogue with people of the Islamic faith and whenever I have been unsure about something, or I have had a query I have contacted some of the Muslims who post to Vox.  In each interaction I have come away feeling that I have learnt so much and I feel less threatened by the religion of Islam. 

 

That is not to say I am not concerned about the levels of violence we are seeing throughout the world, as I am and I am not alone in my concern, as many Muslims share my concerns.

The thought of any type of extremism taking over the world is not something I feel comfortable with and Islam is not alone as far as extremism is concerned. Religion is just one institution prone to extremism.   The thought of any religion or extreme political ideology being forced upon anyone is not something I agree with.   I also know that many of the actions of some western governments have actually helped the spread of Islamic extremism.

 

As someone who is not a Muslim, it is difficult not to fall into the trap of putting all Muslims into one basket, when we continually hear and see reports of Islamic clerics calling for violence against the likes of me.  However, I know there are good and bad people in all religions, so I know better than to make sweeping generalisations based on the actions of some. 

 

Anyway enough I my rambles, the people we need to hear from are the everyday Muslims in our communities.

 

 

 

2007 in response to the War on Terror and also in regards to speaking out.

 

Female Muslim UK:

 

Hi Chezza, just read your post and comments and thought i would contribute to your discussion. I am a Muslim living in the UK and like the majority of people watched the war on terror unfold right before my eyes via the world media; first it was Afghanistan then Iraq. Not a day goes by without Iraqi suicide bombings taking place and civilians and soldiers being killed. Approx 2 Million people marched the streets and i remember helping with the "Not in my name" banners for the demonstrations but it didnt do much good and the war is still going ahead despite the protests. Muslims unfortunately mistrust the government due to this and in the UK you are quite likely to be arrested under the Terrorism Act if you speak out, so the majority of Muslims would rather keep quiet than protest in fear of being labelled a terrorist which is a shame.

 

There is a constant barrage of Islamophobic articles which appear daily in the media which of course makes the problem of any dialogue worse. The government have Muslims spying on each other at mosques, Islamic gatherings etc and the moderate Muslim doesn’t have a platform in the media, only the extremists command centre stage!

 

What is the average Muslim supposed to do? I recently started to write to a female Muslim in prison accused of aiding terrorism but in the end i got so paranoid that the police would start investigating me i stopped communication.

 

The word Islam as u may know comes from the root word salam meaning peace. This is starting to become a cliche in itself, we are telling non-Muslims are religion means peace and all u see in the media is Muslims associated with killing people in terrorist acts! Islam does not condone killing another human being and is against all forms of killing (including abortion) and like another Muslim mentioned Jihad can only take place if certain conditions are met, even at war Muslims are not allowed to harm women and children, the elderly and surrounding wildlife (animals and even chop down trees), In islam you are allowed to defend yourself and your property.

 

I don t think as Muslims we can blame the West entirely for the problems Muslims face today, i personally think its down to their lack of understanding of Islam. We have Muslims who practice their religion once a week (during Jumuah) once a year (during Ramadan) or maybe once in their lifetime. They don’t fully understand what Islam is, they were born into a Muslim family but have mixed the teachings of Islam with their culture resulting in a distorted idea on what Islam is, leading to confusion. Parents are bringing their children up in different cultures and the children are getting confused and these people have nowhere to go, some of them abandon their religion, others turn to these extremist groups who take them in and teach them their own twisted view of Islam.

 

I would say never criticise the religion of Islam based on the actions of those who practise it, the teachings and religion itself is perfect but those (including myself) are prone to making mistakes and becoming forgetful and do not practise the religion properly leading to many of the problems we face today. Everything is down to knowledge, which the Qur'an encourages us to seek knowledge so did the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

 

As for the Power of Nightmares i managed to watch that on tv when it came on and i agree with you that it is a good programme. Also i do recommend you speak to muslims from all back grounds rather than relying on google for your islamic info as for every good muslim site there are at least 10,000 rubbish dodgy ones, the ones that come up first on your google search are not necessarily the good ones, ask Muslims what they recommend :)

 

 

 

Male Muslim – Asia

 

Islam basically preaches moderation in all aspects of daily life, which is why most of us are socialists. As for war, we are not to wage it fool hardily, for a Jihad, a war where all Muslims must stand united can only be called when we are being treated in inhumane conditions for no reason.

From what I've seen so far, the reason why we are being labelled terrorists and have people become hostile towards us is simple. There are people who use our religion as an excuse to justify their hate and prejudice.

 

 

The following responses from Muslims are in response to the following comment (2007):

 

This sounds very reasonable, yet, I have not heard from the Islamic people in protest to this war or denouncing the killing of civilian population. Point me to where they have spoken out in the name of humanity, as I would like to see it. President Reagan said, "Trust, but Verify."

 

I wrote:

 

Here link are some Muslims condemning 9/11, terrorism and war and therefore the killing of civilians

Muslims Condemn Terrorist Acts

Muslims against Terrorism

 

 

 

Male Muslim – US:

 

I would just like to say that it's not my duty as a Muslim to condemn the actions of extremists who claim to be Muslim. I condemn their actions not because I feel compelled to do so; I condemn them out of my own free will. I didn't hear a Christian condemnation or apology for the Virginia Tech shootings in which the murderer was citing verses from the Bible. The point is that we are responsible for ourselves. We all should try to promote peace & understanding, not because of our respective faiths, but because we are human beings.

My official condemnation: "I condemn the acts done in the name of Islam by impostors who have attempted to warp the faith. I condemn them for the fact that they have no concept of the real Islam and that they get rich of foreign governments from outside of the Middle East supplying them with a paycheck and weapons, making it appear that they represent the faith. I condemn them for serving the interests of these foreign governments to divide Muslims to make them more easily conquerable." Thanks : )

 

 

Female Muslim - UK:

 

Thanks for adding my comments onto your responses, when i heard of this latest attempted terrorist attack it made me feel frustrated, sad and angry. We are trying to build bridges of peace love and understanding, and these select few in the name of Islam are trying to kill innocent civilians. The definitions on jihad were spot on, there is nowhere in the Qur'an that mentions "holy" and "war" in the same sentence and the greater jihad is the striving against ones self and one's desires (jihad an nafs).

 

 

 

Hi CHezza

Hope you are safe and well, i just read your comment thanks. Muslims are criticised whatever they do, with the new terrorists threats in the UK, some Muslims have taken full page ads in newspapers condemning the acts and some people have said that not enough is done in the Muslim community to denounce the terrorists so either way we are officially doomed!! One think i would like to say is that not enough thanks and appreciation is shown to non-Muslims like yourself who generally don’t believe the hype and actually take time out to work with Muslims to strive for peace. Since the war in Iraq i have made quite a few friends and associates from groups like "stop the war", who frequently bring up the issue of Islamophobia, the war in Iraq, palestine and campaign for the freeing of prisoners unlawfully detained in places like guantanamo bay.

 

 

 

Female Muslim – US

 

Actually, these accusations drive me insane. The truth is, Muslims condemn violence, all kinds, all the time, but like the title of your post says, our voices go unheard. All one has to do to find us speaking out is google phrases like "muslims for peace," "muslims against terror," "muslims march for peace," etc. The thing about these accusations is that they put us on the defense. Instead of working together, we end up having to prove, over and over again, that the Ummah is speaking out against violence, war, terror, and injustice. The fact is that if one doesn't see Muslims speaking out against violence and actively pursuing peace, it's because one isn't looking. The popular media won't present it because it's "boring" and doesn't match the stereotypes they already portray.

Those who want to know about about what news stories in the Middle East look like might be interested in watching Mosaic. I think Link TV is only available on satellite TV programming, but there is also a podcast of the show.

Finally, one last comment about accusations like this-- every time somebody says Muslims aren't speaking out against violence, all Muslims are lumped together, and Muslims find themselves in a strange place, in which they have to defend Islam, their beliefs, themselves, while still condemning the acts which others commit in the name of Islam. The fact is that, when a white man rapes a woman of color, no one asks white men to prove they are not all vicious, sex-crazed control freaks. And when a Christian man blows up a government building, no one asks all Christians to apologize and speak out against violence. When Christian Serbs carried out genocide against Muslim Bosniak males, nobody asked the entire Christian world to speak out against the violence. No white person will ever be in a position in which he or she will have to defend all white people. No Christian will ever have to defend all Christians. That's because these questions "why don't you speak up against violence/genocide/terror etc." are really just games. They serve no real purpose, because it is very easy to find Muslims all over the world speaking out against violence. Some people who ask these questions don't realize they are playing, perpetuating this game. They haven't thought enough about it to google the phrases I listed. But some people use it as a divisive tool to prove how "backwards" Islam is. To be honest, I'm tired of it, and I don't want to waste my time playing these games.

 

 

 

Some responses to the following questions that I asked:

There is always talk whenever there is a suicide bombing of Shahid and the promise of paradise. Also people throw around some statements of receiving X number of virgins in paradise when they become a martyr for Islam.

Is there somewhere in the Qur'an that the mention of virgins is promised to these martyrs? Also is the concept of Shahid used by extremists to encourage people to become martyrs? Is Shahid a real Islamic concept as written in the Qur'an and is it a case of people using it in situations where it should not be used i.e. just as Jihad is used when it should not be used?

I am concerned as I have seen YouTube footage encouraging young children to practice Shahid. Please note I know that most Muslims do not condone this behaviour but I am wondering why the extremists are able to convince these people to become suicide bombers, so that is why I was wondering is there something in the Qur'an that is being used to indoctrinate these children and adults?

 

 

 

Female Muslim – US

 

I'll try to answer them to the best of my knowledge as briefly as possible; since I'm sure others will have something to say as well. Plus, I'm at work ;)

In my very humble opinion, the idea of receiving 72 virgins is a myth. For one, the number 72 is not stated in the Qur'an. The Qur'an does promise those who enter paradise "splendid companions well-matched" (78:33, Muhammad Asad translation), and "companions pure, most beautiful of eye" (52:20), "mates of modest gaze, whom neither man nor invisible being will have touched ere then" (55:56) and finally: "And We shall pair them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye." (44:54). However, there is no number here. In fact everything is pluralized, so there is really little information regarding how many companions one person will receive. There is also evidence that the spouses of those who enter paradise will be renewed (56:34-36). My point here is that, in reality, we have very little idea of what is in store for those who enter paradise from the Qur'an, which is of course our first resource for all matters regarding faith. Also, there are some interpretations of these verses which regard the promise of "Houris" as promises of rare fruits and, specially, white raisins. I don't know much about these interpretations, but I can see how such would apply to people who lived in the desert.

Now, the number 72 comes from a Hadith, and while I believe the Hadith are critical to our knowledge of Islam and how to practice it properly, I am also very critical and skeptical of Hadith in general. There are tens of thousands of Hadith, most of which were not collected until 200 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. There is a strict Islamic science which was used to evaluate the chain of transmission to ascertain whether or not a Hadith was authentic, and as it is, the Hadith which promises 72 virgins is not considered authentic.

So, in summary, I believe the promise of of 72 virgins is crap.

My response to your question -- why do fanatics get away with this stuff? The fact is, most Muslim have never read the Qur'an in its entirety, just like most Christians have never read the Bible. The Qur'an is taught in schools, and people are told what is said, and in general, they believe it. There is also an issue of translation, for those who do read the Qur'an. There are several translations of the Qur'an which insert parentheses into the text which are actually interpretations and seriously mislead readers. The other issue we have to deal with is basically a large group of disenfranchised people, who feel very wounded by colonialism. So, when you combine these factors, you get an explosive reaction, excuse the pun, which the radicals use to try to accomplish their political goals. These political goals are mostly a result of colonialism and imperialism

Anyway, I'm no Islamic scholar, and only God knows best, but I hope I answered your questions.

 

 

 

Male Muslim – US

Peace be Unto all of you,

I would like to try to shed some light on your questions if I may. The word “Shahid” in Arabic literally means “to witness or testify.” There are various meanings depending on the context in which it is used. One of the meanings of Shahid is martyr. To bare some comparison, Martin Luther King Jr. is probably the best example of a Shahid in the U.S. In this context, it means someone who has stood for a righteous cause and was killed for his faith. Not to oversimplify the issue, but this is basically the meaning of martyrdom, which by the way is not an Islamic innovation. In fact, this was prevalent throughout the history of prophets and their followers.

To my understanding, the ‘virgins’ accusation comes from the arabic word “Hour al Ayn” or pure companions which is found in the Qur’an. Some people with ill intent towards Islam translate this as virgins, which is incorrect. Our friend was correct that this number 72 is based on hadith and is not found in Qur’an. However, no Muslim scholar will claim that all hadith are valid. In fact, they have developed a system called “Eilm al Rijaal” or the study of the narrators of hadith to classify hadith as accepted, strong, weak, etc.

However, the system of Shahadeh and Jihad are valid concepts in Islam based on the Qur’an and the Prophet Muhammad (sas), but not in the way they are all to often portrayed. The bigger “jihad” or struggle according to the Prophet is the struggle against the evil tendencies of the self. The other Jihad or physical struggle is only valid in cases of defense. An unbiased historical analysis of all of the wars of Islam during the life of the Prophet will show that they were all defensive wars. Yes, I will admit that Muslims abused this concept after the departure of the Prophet (sas).

It is clear to all people, not only Muslims, that if someone is oppressed unjustly, he has the right to resist that oppression and take up arms in defense of his family, his land, or his life. I also believe that yes, extremists do foment the wave of Jihad among their people and terrorize others. We should ask ourselves: why are they so successful? For example, many Palestinians teach their kids that the Israelis/Zionism (not the religion of Judaism) is oppressive and it is their duty to fight them. The kids grow up and they see first hand the iron fist of occupation and aggression by the Israelis and they tell themselves, “Yes. My parents were right. “ So the demographics, economics, and social make-up of certain countries make some young Muslims easy recruits.

Also, I should say one more thing. Most of the terrorists acts done around the world are from a small group of marginalized Muslims called Salafis (i.e. Bin Laden, Zarqawi, Zwahiri, etc). They have a warped version of the faith and have killed countless Muslims, Sunnis and Shiites. Fate brought this group unfortunately to vast amounts of wealth and today we have outsiders who purposely promote them to distort the image of Islam and to create sectarian division among Muslms. In my view, they represent Islam just as much as David Quresh and Charles Manson represent Christianity.

I would also advise you to ask a local Muslim scholar these questions, and not to take my word for it. Thanks for reading. May peace be upon you.

 

I also asked for an opinion on a comment that I had directed at me elsewhere on Vox.  In reality it doesn’t really matter who made this comment, as it is not an isolated comment and unfortunately it is a very common perception held by many Westerners

 

"...... the Bible tells us to preach the truth in love. Unlike Islam, wherein the actual writings of Muhammad are violent. His "surahs" (scriptures) in the Qu'ran encourage "jihad" (holy war) against others who believe differently. The religious writings of Mohammad teach his followers that men should beat others into submission of their will: unbelievers, women, children, and if that is ineffective, then kill them. The MSM wants Americans to believe that Islam is a "peaceful" religion, but their actions and their own religious writings preach differently. Don't believe me? See here: Fitna I'm no mind reader, so you tell me what is in the hearts of these men? Actions always speak louder than words."

 

From: Muslims Against Sharia:

 

Factually, the comment (as is Fitna) is correct. There are some teachings in the Koran that incite violence against non-Muslims. This is exactly what we are trying to remove: http://www.reformislam.org/verses.php. What the commenter (just as Fitna) fails to realize (or mention) is that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims that are suffering from radical Islamic teachings. In act, there are more Muslims murdered by Islamists than everybody else combined. The Muslims would be primary beneficiaries if radical Islam ceased to exist. As for "true Muslim", unfortunately it seems that majority of today's Muslims espouse radical Islamic ideology rather than believe in peaceful Islam. We think that we (moderates) are true Muslims. They (radicals) think that they are. Only time will tell who is right.

 

 

Male Muslim US:

May Peace be Upon You,

The film "Fitna" is a gross misrepresentation of Islamic teachings. It was incited as a direct attack on Islam in my view. Those defending it claim that Islam should be subject to criticism like anything else. We as Muslims agree with this, however, we are against abuse. If people have questions or even disagree with Islamic teachings, they can open a dialogue with Muslim leaders instead of taking Qur'anic verses out of context to promote hatred. That's what it's all about... promoting hatred.

Also, the claim that Prophet Muhammad (sas) promoted violence shows the poor level of education of the person that sent you that. Such a claim would be like accusing Jesus of rebellion, inciting social chaos, promoting hatred, being against democracy, promoting racism (being sent only to the house of the lost sheep of Israel), etc. If the maker of this film really wanted to open a dialogue and voice his/her concerns about Islam, the movie would be entitled, "Controversial teachings of Islam explained by Muslim clerics." Instead, it's entitled "Fitna" which means separation or strife. Also, the Bible is filled with passages promoting violence, sexual deviation, unjust punishments, and even execution as a punishment for blasphemy. However, conveniently, those things are never talked about.

Also, this movie in my opinion was created, funded, and promoted by certain groups & state-sponsors to anger Muslims worldwide and to get them to commit violent acts as an excuse for some countries to take up military arms against majority Muslim countries. I believe the Prophet Muhammad cartoons were created for the same purpose.

One more thing if I may... these supposed Muslim clerics who call for violence, how many are they in number? Where did you hear about them? Do you know their credentials? The problem with the media is that they pluck out a few wacko Imams and show them promoting violent rhetoric and action. What about the other 99% of Muslim clerics who call for dialogue? You never hear about them because that does not fit with the Islamophobic media propaganda. That's like me starting a news network featuring the rhetoric of David Quresh, Jerry Falwell, etc. and showing no moderate Christian leaders.

My point is this: If we have absolute freedom of speech and nothing is too sacred, then I'm sure no one will have a problem if the Iranian government were to make a movie with evidence showing that the Holocaust was grossly exaggerated and that 9/11 was an inside job. Nothing is too holy when it comes to freedom of speech according to the producer of this film. What a double-standard! Unbelievable. The truth is that freedom of speech is monopolized and only granted to those select nations who support a particular agenda. That is since Islam cannot be academically defeated; they must resort to distortions, taking things out of context, and plain promotion of hatred.

 

 

Male non-Muslim AU:

 

I have always held the view that the violence we are seeing in the Muslim world is a manifestation of the bitter struggle for ideological supremacy between the moderate and radical schools of Islam. Caught in the middle of the proverbial crossfire is wide swathe of the non-Muslim world. Some people can see this, others can't, and yet there are some who see it as their misguided right to step in and try to force a certain peace come hell or high water. It is the latter group that continues to muddy the waters and creates more confusion than anything.

 

 

 

Male Muslim US reply:

 

Good points and well-said.

The current socio-political climate in the Middle East fosters radical ideologies such as Wahhabism which dominates the Saudi government. Maybe the Bush administration should speak out or boycott the Saudi government instead of holding hands with their leaders and turning a blind eye to the terrorist bombings they are committing in Iraq everyday. Amazing... 10 years ago, there were no organized Muslim militias or terror groups in Iraq, now thanks to the invasion, they have multiplied. If I didn't know better, I would swear this war was simply made to promote violence and get the Muslims to kill each other so others don't have to do it.

 

 

Female Muslim UK:

Peace to you Chezza.

I have refrained from watching the film Fitna as there is enough Islamaphobic programmes on the television where I live. China has taken the heat off us for a while but I am sure we will be number one headlines again soon.

Islam is about peace. When people start labelling themselves as this or that kind of Muslim that is when division begins, about ten years ago the terms "jihadist, moderate/radical muslim extremist etc" did not exist, they have been created by the media.

The Qur'an can never be changed or