euraktiva

Is There a Nexus between Torture and Radicalization?

euraktiva — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:49:26 +0000

By Chris Zambelis A great deal of debate surrounds the factors driving the brand of radical Islam in the Middle East that inspires some individuals to commit acts of violence. A recurring theme in extremist discourse is opposition to incumbent authoritarian regimes in the Middle East. For radical Islamist groups such as al-Qaeda, unwavering U.S. support for the autocracies that rule Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region tops a list of grievances toward what amounts to pillars of U.S. foreign policy in the region. In addition to al-Qaeda, however, most Muslims in the Middle East also see these regimes as oppressive, corrupt and illegitimate. Authoritarian regimes in the region are also widely viewed as compliant agents of a U.S.-led neo-colonial order as opposed to being accountable to their own people. Ironically, having realized that most of al-Qaeda’s leaders and foot soldiers received their start in radical opposition politics in their home countries, including U.S. allies Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the United States identified the persistence of authoritarianism in the Middle East as a critical factor in the spread of radicalization in its call for greater political liberalization and democratization in the region after the September 11 attacks [1]. Radical Islamist discourse highlighting the scourge of authoritarianism in the Middle East takes on many forms. One subject in particular, however, receives a great deal of attention in militant literature, communiqués, and discussions on radical Islamist chat room forums: The practice of systematic torture by the ruling regimes, especially that which occurs in prisons. Brutal and humiliating forms of torture are common instruments of control and coercion by the security services in police states intent on rooting out all forms of dissent. Previously the domain of human rights activists, researchers investigating the many pathways toward radicalization in the Middle East are increasingly considering the impact of torture and other abuses at the hands of the state during periods of incarceration in an effort to better understand the psychology of the radicalization process. Many researchers see these kinds of experiences as formative in the path toward violent radicalization [2]. There is ample evidence that a number of prominent militants—including al-Qaeda deputy commander Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and the late al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi—endured systematic torture at the hands of the Egyptian and Jordanian authorities, respectively (see Terrorism Monitor, May 4, 2006). Many observers believe that their turn toward extreme radicalism represented as much an attempt to exact revenge against their tormentors and, by extension, the United States, as it was about fulfilling an ideology. Those who knew Zawahiri and can relate to his experience believe that his behavior today is greatly influenced by his pursuit of personal redemption to compensate for divulging information about his associates after breaking down amid brutal torture sessions during his imprisonment in the early 1980s [3]. For radical Islamists and their sympathizers, U.S. economic, military, and diplomatic support for regimes that engage in this kind of activity against their own citizens vindicates al-Qaeda’s claims of the existence of a U.S.-led plot to attack Muslims and undermine Islam. In al-Qaeda’s view, these circumstances require that Muslims organize and take up arms in self-defense against the United States and its allies in the region. Torture in Extremist Discourse Radical Islamist literature and discourse is replete with references to torture. The infamous al-Qaeda training manual “Military Studies in the Jihad against the Tyrants,” more commonly referred to as the “Manchester Document,” includes references to the oppression and torture endured by Muslims at the hands of “apostate” rulers whose prisons are “equipped with the most modern torture devices” [4]. Al-Zawahiri’s public statements often contain references to torture by the Egyptian regime and others in the region. In addressing the nature of U.S.-Egyptian relations during a May 2007 statement, Zawahiri criticizes what he labels “American hypocrisy, which calls for democracy even as it considers [Egyptian president] Hosni Mubarak to be one of its closest friends, and which sends detainees to be tortured in Egypt, exports tools of torture to Egypt and spends millions to support the security organs and their executioners in Egypt, even as the American State Department, in its annual report on human rights, criticizes the Egyptian government because it tortures detainees!” [5] Following the July 11, 2007 suicide bombing claimed by al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) against a military barracks in Lakhdaria, Algeria, two members of a radical Islamist chat room forum with seemingly intimate knowledge of Algerian affairs refer to the attack as an act of vengeance and provide insights into the possible motivations of the attackers: “Revenge has come 13 years after the massacre of Lakhdaria perpetrated by members of the base who kidnapped, tortured, and slaughtered 35 Muslims and strew their torn bodies in the streets. Their blood-thirstiness reached the extent of slaughtering an old sheikh (Muhammed Moutadjer) like a sheep after torturing him. There is also a mansion (a villa) which they use as a center (or laboratory as they call it) for brutal torture. This place is called the ‘Villa Copawi,’ established by the French during the period of direct colonialism for the same mission (torture, killing, violation of honor); this place is known to all near and far… “What about the women that were raped inside the barracks in front of their husbands and sons? What about the little girls, no more than ten years old, who were tortured inside the barracks in front of their fathers…? My brother, you have forgotten about all this, but we have not forgotten and will never forget. This is a day of judgment for the Pharaoh of Algeria and his soldiers” [6]. Explicit references to accounts of torture in the region by al-Qaeda and other militants helps sustain the narrative that Muslims and Islam as a whole are under siege by a hostile U.S.-led campaign. These messages also resonate with wide segments of society in U.S.-backed authoritarian regimes in the region. Torture and Social Control In the Middle East, the use of torture is not reserved for violent militants. On the contrary, authoritarian regimes regularly resort to draconian measures against moderate democratic reform-minded Islamists such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, secular and liberal opposition dissidents, or even student protestors to eliminate challenges to their rule. These measures are often carried out in the name of maintaining stability or protecting national security. In reality, they are about regime survival. Many observers are convinced that this vicious cycle of systematic abuse has the potential to radicalize dissident activists, leading some to join the ranks of violent militants to avenge their ordeal. At the very least, these practices vindicate the claims of extremists regarding the conduct of regional governments. The accounts of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq shocked Americans and the international community. In the Middle East, however, the extent of the abuses uncovered at Abu Ghraib was not out of the ordinary. In many ways, the events at Abu Ghraib were emblematic of what many have grown accustomed to in their own countries. Severe beatings, electric shocks, sexual humiliation and abuse, sleep and food deprivation, and threats against family members and associates, among other things, are common tactics used by authoritarian regimes to attack their opponents. By perpetuating a climate of fear, authoritarian regimes are able to engender a kind of tacit obedience among citizens. Addressing the prevalence of torture, let alone the nexus between torture and radicalization, remains a taboo in the Middle East. Due to fears of reprisals by the authorities, many researchers and journalists in the region practice a form of self-censorship when addressing the topic. As a result, there is a dearth of primary source research on the topic. At the same time, a number of organizations and opposition dissidents are beginning to raise the issue, despite fears of reprisals by the authorities [7]. The disclosure of a graphic video of Egyptian police officers beating and sexually abusing Emad al-Kabir—who was held by police officers at a police station in the Boulaq el-Dakrour section of Giza in Greater Cairo for apparently resisting authorities during a January 2006 incident when he attempted to mediate a dispute between the officers and his cousin—caused outrage in the Middle East. The abusers filmed the ordeal and forwarded the footage to the cell phones of the detainee’s friends to humiliate their victim (Daily Star Egypt, May 22). Al-Kabir was neither an Islamic militant nor a political dissident. Nevertheless, graphic scenes from the video appeared amid firsthand accounts of similar experiences endured by ordinary citizens and political dissidents in the Middle East during a lengthy videotaped statement by Zawahiri released in July 2007. Zawahiri devoted a segment of his presentation to the issue of torture in the Middle East in a savvy effort to reach out to a mainstream audience [8]. This controversial subject was also brought to the forefront of debate with the publication of the widely popular Egyptian novel Imarat Yacoubian (The Yacoubian Building) by Alaa al-Aswany [9]. The book treats the nexus between torture and radicalization through the character of Taha al-Shazli, a disaffected young man who joins an Islamist opposition group in Cairo. After being detained for taking part in a public demonstration, Taha is subject to extreme forms of torture by the hands of the Egyptian security officials, including severe beatings and sexual abuse, in an attempt to extract information about his political affiliations and the identities of his associates. Taha, angry and humiliated at his ordeal, is eventually released by his captors but is never the same. Bent on exacting revenge on his tormentors, Taha’s disaffection with the Egyptian regime evolves into a visceral hatred that can only be satisfied through violence. Al-Aswany’s fictional account of Taha’s experience provides a glimpse into one aspect of the radicalization process in the Middle East that is too often ignored. Conclusion Based on the discourse of al-Qaeda and other radical Islamist organizations, the current trajectory of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East will continue to serve as a battle cry for militants to take up arms against the United States. The prevalence of systematic torture and the persistence of authoritarianism in countries the United States counts as loyal allies will facilitate this process. These conditions will also provide al-Qaeda’s highly-effective media and propaganda wings with ample material to implicate the United States in the activities of regional security services. Regardless of political sensitivities, this subject requires far more attention from serious researchers examining the paths toward political radicalization. Notes 1. Chris Zambelis, “The Strategic Implications of Political Liberalization and Democratization in the Middle East,” Parameters 35(3), Autumn 2005, pp. 87-102. 2. Thomas Heghammer, “Terrorist Recruitment and Radicalization in Saudi Arabia,” Middle East Policy 13(4), December 2006, pp. 39-60. 3. Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri’s experience in an Egyptian prison and the torture endured by his associates is chronicled in Montasser al-Zayat, The Road to Al-Qaeda: The Story of Bin Laden’s Right-Hand Man, (London, Pluto Press, 2004), pp. 31-32. 4. See Part I of “Military Studies in the Jihad against the Tyrants” at http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/manualpart1_1.pdf. 5. “Interview with Sheikh Ayman al-Zawahiri,” Al-Sahab Media, May 5, 2007. 6. Quoted in “Al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb/The Suicide Bomber Suhaib Pulverizes a Barracks,” [Arabic] July 18, 2007 at www.tajdeed.org.uk [no longer accessible]. 7. In Egypt groups such as the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) are at the forefront of shedding light on the prevalence of torture by the security services and advocating on behalf of victims. For more details, see ar.eohr.org. For more graphic accounts of torture in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East, see www.tortureinegypt.net. 8. See excerpts from Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri’s July 4, 2007 statement addressing the issue of torture in the Middle East, entitled “The Advice of One Concerned” at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a_K2sxgRKk . The entire video is available at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7664209432789370243&hl=en . 9. Alaa al-Aswany, The Yacoubian Building, (Cairo, American University of Cairo Press, 2004).

Printer-Friendly Version	Email this article to a friend

PREVIOUS ISSUESVolume 6, Issue 12 (June 12, 2008) - Nigeria and the Threat of al-Qaeda Terrorism - Military Operations in FATA: Eliminating Terrorism or Preventing the Balkanization of Pakistan? - Turkey’s Multifaceted Anti-PKK Strategy Continues to Unfold - Rotation of Coalition Forces Brings New Hope to Helmand Province Volume 6, Issue 11 (May 29, 2008) - Is Iran’s Mujahideen-e-Khalq a Threat to the Islamist Regime? - Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Return to the Afghan Insurgency - Khyber Tribal Agency: A New Hub of Islamist Militancy in Pakistan - Turkey Launches Economic Offensive against PKK Recruitment
C

1111 16th St. NW
Suite #320
Washington, DC 20036
202.483.8888
202.483.8337 fax
pubs@jamestown.org

U.S. Out of Pakistan !

euraktiva — Thu, 29 May 2008 12:00:07 +0000

By Alizeh Haider

In a recent meeting with corporate leaders in Karachi, the U.S Ambassador Anne W. Patterson expressed her surprise at the ‘depth of Anti-Americanism’ in Pakistan. She said, “I suspect that those who oppose American engagement in Pakistan have a limited understanding of how our partnerships—economic assistance and financial interactions—changed the lives of everyday Pakistanis in real and positive ways.”

I assure Her Excellency that such is not the case and that we are not an abysmally ungrateful bunch. We know very well that our country’s economy cannot sustain itself and that financial help from other countries like America is helping us barely stay afloat.

The source of anti-American sentiment, thus, is not Pakistanis’ lack of acknowledgement and appreciation for America’s economic assistance. Rather, our sense of resentment and deprivation is the result of the pound of flesh which America demands in return—that is, the sovereignty of our people.

America’s manna comes from a poisoned chalice. Years of American aid and financial assistance have had a corrosive effect on Pakistan’s institutions and its society. It has made America perhaps the most powerful force in Pakistan and has severed the natural links of accountability between governments and people. While American money may have fed thousands of hungry in Pakistan, it has also fed violence, alienation and distrust in our society.

America’s unaccountable and unquestioning generosity towards our military has made it resistant to democratic checks and has severely distorted the balance of powers between important state institutions, creating an air of conflict and mistrust between them. America pays military governments several million dollars a year and many more directly to our military, and in return it uses our military and our land to further its own political agenda in the region. On the one hand America professes the importance of democracy in Pakistan in which the ultimate sounding board is the will of the people, and on the other hand America has deprived the people of their power.

What better example of this than the current political crisis in Pakistan? Deny all it will, America has and continues to micro-manage our affairs. Despite all its hollow claims of supporting democracy and fighting terrorism, America continues to back autocratic, dictatorial, military rulers, thereby increasing public alienation, social turmoil and political instability.

In the elections of 2008, the people of Pakistan gave General Musharraf and his cronies the order of the boot. In no uncertain terms, the message given by the people of Pakistan was that they no longer want a military rule which does not empower the people, which does not put national interest first, and which is exceedingly obedient to foreign orders. Being seen as a close American ally cost Musharraf and his cronies heavily. However, once again, the will of the people was vetoed by America, and regardless of the fact that the majority of the people would like to see the back of Pervez Musharaf, he remains seated in the Presidency, probably sending thank you emails to President Bush every morning.

Another example of how American involvement in Pakistan has created strife and instability in the country is the never-ending judges’ saga. The people of Pakistan have very courageously taken a stand for the reinstatement of the judges illegally and unconstitutionally deposed by General Musharraf on Nov 3. But the U.S. continues to arm-twist Pakistani leaders into acquiescence and is pressuring the coalition government into making an unpopular decision. Such underhand maneuverings by America will only go towards weakening democracy in Pakistan by creating mistrust between the people and their leaders. Resultantly, yet another military dictator who has for years been feeding on America’s dole would find this a perfect opportunity to step up and anoint himself the savior of the nation.

It would not be incorrect to say that the people of Pakistan, irrespective of gender, age or class, resent America’s intrusiveness in our domestic and foreign affairs, and feel that Pakistan has been a victim (sometimes a willing victim) of America’s ruthless foreign policy. Apart from those who are direct beneficiaries of American involvement in Pakistan, most Pakistanis would like to see America stop its meddling and allow indigenous political forces to create and partake in a transparent and legitimate political process.

If America genuinely wants to help Pakistan, then it must show respect for the will of the people of this country. If the “war on terror” is really a war on terror and if America is committed to winning it, then the best thing it can do is help create a stable and moderate Pakistan. This can only be done if America distances itself from the governance of the country and alleviates the feeling of alienation and helplessness amongst the people by allowing them to play their rightful role in the political process.

Defending Shariah, Undermining Shariah

euraktiva — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:38:51 +0000

By: Khalid Baig Posted: 24 Rabi-ul-Awwal 1429, 1 April 2008 Two statements on Shariah, made in February and March of this year by two prominent leaders in the UK and US have generated a storm of protest and praise. Both the statements and the reaction they generated are of interest to the students of history and Western civilization. They help us gauge the state of religious freedom and open mindedness in the Western world today. The first was from Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, who suggested that for some personal matters like marriage and divorce Muslims in the UK could be allowed to be governed by the Shariah. He did not suggest that all personal matters for Muslims in the UK be so governed. He would pick and choose which personal matters would be so privileged and which would not, in effect awarding the right to second guess the Shariah to the Church of England whose law is an integral part of the law in the UK. IslamÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s inheritance laws, for example, would not be permitted under his proposal. Of course, to propose even this much he had to say that the Shariah was not all that bad after all, despite all the propaganda against it. He wrote: Ã¢â‚¬Å“In conclusion, it seems that if we are to think intelligently about the relations between Islam and British law, we need a fair amount of ‘deconstruction’ of crude oppositions and mythologies, whether of the nature of sharia or the nature of the Enlightenment.Ã¢â‚¬ In other words we have told a lot of lies about the Shariah for all these centuries. Now the circumstances require us to engage with the Muslims in a different manner and therefore we have to acknowledge some of our lies and distortions as lies and distortions. The response to this modest proposal was a tsunami of protests and condemnations. There were calls from wide areas of British media and leadership for retraction and even resignation by the archbishop. Ã‚Â The second statement came from Harvard Law professor and Islamic expert Noah Feldman in an article in the New York Times in March. Feldman who reportedly is fluent in both Arabic and Hebrew, has deep interests in the Muslim world. He worked as a consultant for the occupation in Iraq and drafted the constitutions of occupied Iraq and occupied Afghanistan. He keeps a close eye on the developments in the Muslim world and knows that the people there have been longing for the rule of Shariah. He wants to satisfy this thirst without giving up the objectives of occupation. For this he has come up with a brilliant two-step approach. One, acknowledge that Shariah has had a bad press and that it has been a source of good in the past. Two, practically take all that praise back by suggesting that today Shariah is no longer a viable option in the form it has been applied in the past. Today it will have to be implemented using secular institutions manned by non-scholars. He tactfully presents this proposition so it appears that this is not something being imposed by a colonial master. Rather this state has been arrived at by the doings of the Muslim societies and leaders themselves. Naturally, like Williams, he had to praise the Shariah for its past glory. He noted that Shariah meant rule of law and was responsible for the check on the powers of the rulers. Ã¢â‚¬Å“Without Shariah, there would have been no Haroun al-Rashid in Baghdad, no golden age of Muslim Spain, no reign of Suleiman the Magnificent in Istanbul.Ã¢â‚¬ His article also generated a storm of criticism in the US. In both cases Muslims were overjoyed at the generous support for the Shariah offered by these notables. Their statements were reproduced at countless Muslim web sites in deep appreciation. Unfortunately, reading the two gentlemen more carefully would dampen that enthusiasm. To begin with, none of them offered their suggestion as a matter of principle. Williams clearly gave the rationale that it would be a prudent policy for better community cohesion. Religious freedom is not a principle but a policy matter. And the problem with policies is that they are dictated by policy goals and are subject to change as the goals or the perceived means of attaining them change. While community cohesion is a noble goal, Williams has his eyes set on another not-so-noble a goal as well. He calls it Ã¢â‚¬Å“transformative accommodation.Ã¢â‚¬ His accommodation for the Shariah is aimed at transforming it. The idea is to set up mechanisms for exerting internal pressures on Shariah authorities to transform the Shariah. This he hopes to achieve when a party to a dispute finds a greater award from a secular court instead of the Shariah court and is tempted to choose that. When people shop around for legal judgements in a Ã¢â‚¬Å“competitive marketÃ¢â‚¬ this will help improve the law according to him. One wonders if he would be willing to use that as a general recipe to improve all law or is the special treatment reserved only for the Shariah. Feldman is equally interesting in his efforts to separate the Shariah from the true Shariah experts, i.e. the scholars. It is clear that his support for the Shariah is premised on the condition that the authority to decide Shariah rulings is vested in secular parliamentarians and judges and not the scholars. However he ingeniously lays the blame for the loss of authority of the scholars on the Ottoman rulers and their attempt to codify Islamic laws in the 19th century. Codification meant that scholars were no longer needed to interpret them, he claims. It is like claiming that codification of laws should lead to unemployment for lawyers and judges. The fact is that codification or no codification, Islamic scholarsÃ¢â‚¬â€ being the experts of Islamic lawÃ¢â‚¬â€ would always be needed to interpret Islamic law. The real reason for the current state of affairs in the Muslim world is its colonial past (and present) but Feldman says not a word about that. Do we need to remind him that Lord Macaulay, who introduced British Penal Code in India, had boasted in his 1835 Minutes on Education that Muslim books of jurisprudence would soon be history? Although his prediction did not come true, his purpose hardly needs any elaboration. Feldman also knows the value of decorative clauses like the repugnancy clause (No law will be made against the Shariah) he put in the Afghanistan and Iraq constitutions. It sounds good and assures the masses that the constitution is Islamic, but in effect is worthless. First, there is a world of difference between saying that all laws will flow from the Shariah (as the Shariah requires while he has been careful in keeping such a statement out of those constitutions) and the repugnancy clause. Second, the mechanism for deciding which laws are against the Shariah is sufficiently and deliberately so weak that it could not even prevent the signing of the notorious CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women) by these countries. As is well-known, that fancy name is a cover for a hideous attempt to replace Islamic Shariah with the one made at the UN. The allocation of a quota for womenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s seats in the Iraqi and Afghan parliaments, which is mentioned by Feldman with a great sense of achievement, is another example of a Ã¢â‚¬Å“ShariahÃ¢â‚¬ imposed by the occupation. Despite FeldmanÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s charming words, it is difficult to swallow that an occupation that has engineered the deaths of hundreds of thousands of women and children is exactly interested in their welfare. What all this boils down to is that their support for the Shariah is actually aimed at undermining it without appearing to be doing so. It is difficult to get enthusiastic about such support. It was this Shariah that gave Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims living in the Islamic state freedom to be governed by their own religious laws as interpreted by their religious authorities in all personal matters. It did so as a matter of principle. It has done so since the seventh century. Fast forward to the twenty-first century and contrast this with the current suggestion that a fraction of those freedoms be allowed Muslims in the West. The proposal was laced with questionable intents and even then met with open hostility. To both Williams and Feldman we say that we appreciate that you have shown some realization that the Shariah has been maligned to the max by a vicious media in the West. The honourable thing would then be to openly recognize this fact and sincerely try to make up for the damage done. But this cannot happen unless you recognize freedom of religion the way Islam did. As a matter of principleÃ¢â‚¬â€not policy.

Ruling on celebrating the birthday of the Prophet

euraktiva — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:16:35 +0000

Praise be to Allaah the Lord of the Worlds, and blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and all his family and companions. The commands mentioned in the Qur’aan and Sunnah to follow the laws of Allaah and His Messenger, and the prohibitions on introducing innovations into the religion are quite clear. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

”Say (O Muhammad to mankind): ‘If you (really) love Allaah, then follow me (i.e. accept Islamic Monotheism, follow the Qur’aan and the Sunnah), Allaah will love you and forgive you your sins’”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:31]

”Follow what has been sent down unto you from your Lord (the Qur’aan and Prophet Muhammad’s Sunnah), and follow not any Awliyaa’ (protectors and helpers who order you to associate partners in worship with Allaah), besides Him (Allaah). Little do you remember!”

[al-A’raaf 7:3]

”And verily, this is My straight path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His path”

[al-A’naam 6:153]

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The most truthful of speech is the Book of Allaah and the best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the most evil of things are those which are newly-invented. ” And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever innovates anything in this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), that is not part of it will have it rejected.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 2697; Muslim, no. 1718). According to a version narrated by Muslim, “Whoever doe anything that is not in accordance with this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), will have it rejected.”

Among the reprehensible innovations that people have invented is the celebration of the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in the month of Rabee’ al-Awwal. They celebrate this occasion in various ways:

Some of them simply make it an occasion to gather and read the story of the Mawlid, then they present speeches and qaseedahs (odes) for this occasion.

Some of them make food and sweets etc., and offer them to the people present.

Some of them hold these celebrations in the mosques, and some of them hold them in their houses.

Some people do not limit themselves to the actions mentioned above; they include in these gatherings haraam and reprehensible things, such as free mixing of men and women, dancing and singing, or committing actions of shirk such as seeking the help of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), calling upon him, seeking his support against their enemies and so on.

Whatever form it takes and whatever the intentions of those who do this are, there is no doubt whatsoever that it is an invented, haraam innovation which was introduced by the Shi’a Faatimids after the three best centuries, in order to corrupt the religion of the Muslims. The first person to do this after them was the king al-Muzaffar Abu Sa’eed Kawkaboori, the king of Irbil, at the end of the sixth century or the beginning of the seventh century AH, as was mentioned by the historians such as Ibn Khalkaan and others. Abu Shaamah said: the first person to do that in Mosul was Shaykh ‘Umar ibn Muhammad al-Malaa, one of the well-known righteous people. Then the ruler of Irbil and others followed his example.

Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer said in al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah (13/137), in his biography of Abu Sa’eed Kazkaboori: “He used to observe the Mawlid in Rabee’ al-Awwal and hold a huge celebration on that occasion… some of those who were present at the feast of al-Muzaffar on some occasions of the Mawlid said that he used to offer in the feast five thousand grilled heads of sheep, ten thousand chickens and one hundred thousand large dishes, and thirty trays of sweets… he would let the Sufis sing from Zuhr until Fajr, and he himself would dance with them.”

Ibn Khalkaan said in Wafiyaat al-A’yaan (3/274): “When it is the first of Safar they decorate those domes with various kinds of fancy adornments, and in every dome there sits a group of singers and a group of puppeteers and players of musical instruments, and they do not leave any one of those domes without setting up a group (of performers) there.

The people give up work during this period, and they do no work except going around and watching the entertainment. When there are two days to go until the Mawlid, they bring out a large number of camels, cows and sheep, more than can be described, and they accompany them with all the drums, songs and musical instruments that they have, until they bring them to the square… On the night of the Mawlid there are performances of nasheed after Maghrib in the citadel.”

This is the origin of this celebration on the occasion of the Prophet’s birthday. More recently idle entertainment, extravagance, and wasting of money and time have become associated with an innovation for which Allaah has not sent down any authority.

What Muslims should do is to revive the Sunnah and put an end to bid’ah (innovation) ; they should not do any action until they know the ruling of Allaah concerning it.

Ruling on celebrating the Prophet’s birthday

Celebrating the occasion of the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is forbidden and is to be rejected for a number of reasons:

1 – it is not part of the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or of the khaleefahs who succeeded him. Since this is the case, then it is a forbidden innovation, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to follow my Sunnah and the way of the rightly-guided khaleefahs after me; adhere to it and cling to it firmly. Beware of newly-invented things, for every newly-invented thing is an innovation (bid’ah) and every innovation is a going-astray. ” (Narrated by Ahmad, 4/126; al-Tirmidhi no. 2676).

Celebrating the Mawlid is an innovation introduced by the Shi’a Faatimids after the three best centuries in order to corrupt the religion of the Muslims. If a person does anything in order to draw closer to Allaah which was not done by the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or enjoined by him, and was not done by the khaleefahs who succeeded him, this action implies that he is accusing the Messenger of not explaining the religion to the people, and that he disbelieves in the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“This day, I have perfected your religion for you”

[al-Maa’idah 5:3]

because he is adding something extra and claiming that it is a part of the religion, but the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not bring this.

2 – Celebrating the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is an imitation of the Christians, because they celebrate the birth of the Messiah (peace be upon him). Imitating them is extremely haraam. The hadeeth tells us that it is forbidden to imitate the kuffaar, and we are commanded to differ from them. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them” (narrated by Ahmad, 2/50; Abu Dawood, 4/314). And he said, “Be different from the mushrikeen” (narrated by Muslim, 1/222, no. 259) – especially with regard to things that are the symbols or rituals of their religion.

3 – Besides being bid’ah and an imitation of the Christians, both of which are haraam, celebrating the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also a means that leads to exaggeration and excess in venerating him, which even goes as far as calling upon him (making du’aa’ to him) and seeking his help, instead of calling upon Allaah, as happens now among many of those who observe the bid’ah of the Mawlid, when they call upon the Messenger instead of Allaah, and ask him for support, and sing qaseedahs (odes) of shirk praising him, like Qaseedat al-Burdah etc. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade going to extremes in praising him, as he said: “Do not extol as the Christians extolled the son of Maryam. For I am just His slave, so say, the slave of Allaah and His Messenger” (narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4/142, no. 3445; al-Fath, 6/551), i.e., do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians exaggerated in praising the Messiah and venerated him until they worshipped him instead of Allaah. Allaah forbade them to do that when he said (interpretation of the meaning):

“O people of the Scripture (Christians) ! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allaah aught but the truth. The Messiah ‘Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allaah and His Word, (”Be!” — and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rooh) created by Him”

[al-Nisaa’ 4:171]

Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade us to exaggerate concerning him lest the same thing happen to us as happened to them, so he said: “Beware of exaggeration, for those who came before you were destroyed because of exaggeration” (narrated by al-Nasaa’i, 5/268; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan al-Nasaa’i, no. 2863).

4 – Observing the innovation of the Prophet’s birthday opens the door to other kinds of bid’ah and being distracted by them from the Sunnah. Hence you find that the innovators are very active when it comes to bid’ah and very lazy when it comes to the Sunnah; they hate it and regard those who follow it as enemies, until their entire religion is innovated anniversaries and Mawlids. They have split into various groups, each of which commemorates the anniversary of its imaam’s birth, such as the births of al-Badawi, Ibn ‘Arabi, al-Dasooqi and al-Shaadhili. No sooner do they end the celebration of one birthday but they start the celebration of another. This results in exaggeration concerning these dead people and others, and in calling upon them instead of Allaah, believing that they can bring benefit and cause harm, until they deviate from the religion of Allaah and go back to the religion of the people of the Jaahiliyyah of whom Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And they worship besides Allaah things that harm them not, nor profit them, and they say: ‘These are our intercessors with Allaah’”

[Yoonus 10:18]

”And those who take Awliyaa’ (protectors, helpers, lords, gods) besides Him (say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allaah’”

[al-Zumar 39:3]

Discussing the specious arguments of those who celebrate the Mawlid

Those who think that this bid’ah should be continued produce specious arguments which are flimsier than a spider’s web. These specious arguments may be dealt with as follows:

1 – Their claim that this is veneration of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him):

The response to that is that the way to venerate him is to obey him, do as he commanded and avoid that which he forbade, and to love him; he is not to be venerated through innovations, myths and sins. Celebrating his birthday is of this blameworthy type because it is a sin. The people who venerated the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) the most were the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them), as ‘Urwah ibn Mas’ood said to Quraysh: “O people, by Allaah I have visited kings. I went to Caesar, Chosroes and the Negus, but by Allaah I never saw a king whose companions venerated him as much as the companions of Muhammad venerated Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). By Allaah, whenever he spat it never fell on the ground, it fell into into the hand of one his companions, then they wiped their faces and skins with it. If he instructed them to do something, they would hasten to do as he commanded. When he did wudoo’, they would almost fight over his water. When he spoke they would lower their voices in his presence; and they did not stare at him out of respect for him.” (al-Bukhaari, 3/178, no. 2731, 2732; al-Fath, 5/388). Yet despite this level of veneration, they never took the day of his birth as an ‘Eid (festival). If that had been prescribed in Islam they would not have neglected to do that.

2 – Using as evidence the fact that many people in many countries do this.

The response to that is that evidence consists of that which is proven from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and what is proven from the Prophet is that innovations are forbidden in general, and this is an innovation. What people do, if it goes against the evidence (daleel), does not prove anything, even if many of them do it.

“And if you obey most of those on the earth, they will mislead you far away from Allaah’s path”

[al-An’aam 6:116 – interpretation of the meaning]

Nevertheless, in every age, praise be to Allaah, there have always been those who denounce this bid’ah and state clearly that it is false. Those who persist in following it after the truth had been explained to them have no proof.

Among those who denounced the celebration of this occasion was Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, in Iqtidaa’ al-Siraat al-Mustaqeem; Imaam al-Shaatibi in al-’I’tisaam; Ibn al-Haaj in al-Madkhil; Shaykh Taaj al-Deen ‘Ali ibn ‘Umar al-Lakhami who wrote an entire book denouncing it; Shaykh Muhammad Basheer al-Sahsawaani al-Hindi in his book Siyaanah al-Insaan; al-Sayyid Muhammad Rasheed Ridaa wrote a separate essay on this topic; Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem Aal al-Shaykh wrote a separate essay on it; Shaykh ‘Abd al-’Azeez ibn Baaz; and others who are still writing and denouncing this bid’ah every year in the pages of newspapers and magazines, at the time when this bid’ah is being done.

3 – They say that by celebrating the Mawlid they are keeping the memory of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) alive.

The answer to that is that the memory of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is constantly kept alive by the Muslim, such as when his name (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is mentioned in the adhaan and iqaamah and in khutbahs, and every time the Muslim recites the Shahaadatayn after doing wudoo’ and in the prayers, and every time he sends blessings upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in his prayers and when he is mentioned, and every time the Muslim does a waajib (obligatory) or mustahabb (recommended) action that was prescribed by the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). In all of these ways (the Muslim) remembers him and the reward equivalent to the reward of the one who does that action goes back to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Thus the Muslim constantly keeps the memory of the Messenger alive and has a connection with him night and day throughout his life through that which Allaah has prescribed, not only on the day of the Mawlid and things which are bid’ah and go against the Sunnah, for that puts one at a distance from the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the Messenger will disown him because of that.

The Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has no need of this innovated celebration, because Allaah has already bestowed veneration and respect upon him, as He says:

“and raised high your fame”

[al-Sharh 94:4]

For Allaah is not mentioned in the adhaan, iqaamah or khutbah, but the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is mentioned after Him; this is sufficient veneration, love and renewal of his memory, ad sufficient encouragement to follow him.

Allaah did not refer to the birth of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in the Qur’aan, rather He referred to his Mission, and says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Indeed, Allaah conferred a great favour on the believers when He sent among them a Messenger (Muhammad) from among themselves”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:124]

”He it is Who sent among the unlettered ones a Messenger (Muhammad) from among themselves”

[al-Jumu’ah 64:2]

4 – They may say that the celebration of the Prophet’s birthday was introduced by a knowledgeable and just king who intended thereby to draw closer to Allaah.

Our response to that is that bid’ah is not acceptable, no matter who does it. A good intention does not justify a bad deed and even if a person died as a knowledgeable and righteous person, this does not mean that he was infallible.

5 – They say that celebrating the mawlid comes under the heading of bid’ah hasanah (”good innovation”) because it is based on giving thanks to Allaah for the Prophet!

Our response to that is that there is nothing good in innovation. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever innovates anything in this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), that is not part of it will have it rejected.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 2697; al-Fath, 5/355). And he said, “Every innovation is a going astray” (narrated by Ahmad, 4/126; al-Tirmidhi, no. 2676). The ruling on innovations is that they are all misguidance, but this specious argument suggests that not every bid’ah is a going astray, rather there are good innovations.

Al-Haafiz ibn Rajab said in Sharh al-Arba’een: “The words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), ‘every innovation is a going astray’ is a concise but comprehensive comment which includes everything; it is one of the most important principles of religion. It is like his words ‘Whoever innovates anything in this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), that is not part of it will have it rejected.’ (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3/167, no. 2697; al-Fath, 5/355). Whoever innovates anything and attributes it to Islam when it has no basis in the religion, this is a going astray and is nothing to do with Islam, whether that has to do with matters of belief (’aqeedah) or outward and inward words and deeds.”

(Jaami’ al-’Uloom wa’l-Hakam, p. 233)

These people have no proof that there is any such thing as a “good innovation” apart from the words of ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) concerning Taraaweeh prayers, “What a good innovation this is.” (Saheeh al-Bukhaari, 2/252, no. 2010 mu’allaqan; al-Fath 4/294).

They also said that things were innovated which were not denounced by the salaf, such as compiling the Qur’aan into one volume and writing and compiling the hadeeth.

The response to that is that these matters had a basis in Islam, so they were not newly-invented.

’Umar said: “What a good bid’ah” meaning innovation in the linguistic sense, not in the shar’i sense. Whatever has a basis in Islam, if it is described as an innovation, is an innovation in the linguistic sense, not in the shar’i sense, because innovation in the shar’i sense means that which has no basis in Islam.

Compiling the Qur’aan into one book has a basis in Islam, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had commanded that the Qur’aan be written down, but it was scattered, so the Sahaabah compiled it in one volume so as so protect and preserve it.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) led his companions in praying Taraaweeh for a while, then he stopped doing that, lest that become obligatory on them. The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) continued to pray it separately during the life of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and after his death, until ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with them) gathered them behind one imaam as they used to pray behind the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). This was not an innovation introduced into the religion.

Writing down the hadeeth also has a basis in Islam. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ordered that some ahaadeeth should be written down for some of his companions when they asked him for that. In general terms writing it down during his lifetime was not allowed, for fear that the Qur’aan might be mixed with things that were not part of it. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, this fear was no longer a factor, because the Qur’aan had been completed and arranged in order before he died. The Muslims compiled the Sunnah after that in order to preserve it and keep it from being lost. May Allaah reward them with good on behalf of Islam and the Muslims, because they preserved the Book of their Lord and the Sunnah of their Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) from being lost or being tampered with.

We may also say to them: why was this act of thanksgiving, as they call it, not done by the best generations, the Sahaabah, Taabi’een and followers of the Taabi’een, who loved the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) most and who were most keen to do good and give thanks? Are those who introduced the innovation of the Mawlid more rightly-guided than them? Do they give more thanks to Allaah? Definitely not!

6 – They may say that celebrating the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is indicative of their love for him; this is one way of showing that, and showing love of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is prescribed in Islam!

The answer to that is that undoubtedly loving the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is obligatory for every Muslim; he should love him more than he loves himself, his child, his father and all the people – may my father and mother be sacrificed for him – but that does not mean that we should introduce innovations for doing so that have not been prescribed for us. Loving him dictates that we should obey him and follow him, for that is one of the greatest manifestations of love, as it is said:

”If your love is sincere then obey him; for the lover obeys the one whom he loves.”

Loving the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) implies keeping his Sunnah alive, adhering firmly to it, and avoiding words and deeds that go against it. Undoubtedly everything that goes against his Sunnah is a reprehensible innovation (bid’ah) and a manifest act of disobedience. That includes celebrating his birthday and other kinds of bid’ah. A good intention does not mean that it is permissible to introduce innovations into the religion. Islam is based on two things, purity of intention and following [the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)]. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Yes, but whoever submits his face (himself) to Allaah (i.e. follows Allaah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism) and he is a Muhsin (a doer of good) then his reward is with his Lord (Allaah), on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve”

[al-Baqarah 2:112]

Submitting one’s face to Allaah means being sincere towards Allaah, and doing good means following the Messenger and implementing the Sunnah.

7 – Another of their specious arguments is when they say that by celebrating the Mawlid and reading the biography of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) on this occasion, they are encouraging people to follow his example!

We say to them that reading the biography of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and following his example are required of the Muslim all the time, all year long and throughout his life. Singling out a specific day for that with no evidence for doing so is an innovation, and every innovation is a going astray.” (Narrated by Ahmad, 4/164; al-Tirmidhi, 2676). Bid’ah does not bear any fruit but evil and it leads to a person distancing himself from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

In conclusion, celebrating the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), whatever form it takes, is a reprehensible innovation. The Muslims should put a stop to this and other kinds of bid’ah, and occupy themselves with reviving and adhering to the Sunnah. They should not be deceived by those who promote and defend this bid’ah, for these types of people are more interested in keeping innovations alive than in reviving the Sunnah; they may not even care about the Sunnah at all. Whoever is like this, it is not permissible to imitate him or follow his example, even if the majority of people are like this. Rather we should follow the example of those who follow the path of the Sunnah, among the righteous salaf and their followers, even if they are few. Truth is not measured by the men who speak it, rather men are measured by the truth.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever among you lives (for a long time) will see many differences. I urge you to follow my Sunnah and the way of the rightly-guided khaleefahs who come after me. Hold on to it firmly. Beware of newly-invented matters, for every innovation is a going astray.” (Narrated by Ahmad, 4/126; al-Tirmidhi no. 2676). So the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) explained to us in this hadeeth what we should do when there are differences of opinion, just as he explained that everything that goes against his Sunnah, be it words or deeds, is a bid’ah, and every bid’ah is a going astray.

If we see that there is no basis for celebrating the birthday of the Prophet, whether in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or in the way of the rightly-guided khaleefahs, then it is one of the newly-invented matters, one of the bid’ahs which lead people astray. This principle is what is implied by this hadeeth and is what is indicated by the aayah (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger (Muhammad), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger, if you believe in Allaah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination”

[al-Nisaa’ 4:59]

Referring to Allaah means referring to His Book, and referring to the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) means referring to his Sunnah after he has passed away. The Qur’aan and Sunnah are the reference point in cases of dispute. Where in the Qur’aan or Sunnah does it indicate that it is prescribed in Islam to celebrate the Prophet’s birthday? Whoever does that or thinks that it is good must repent to Allaah from this and from other kinds of bid’ah. This is the attitude of the Muslim who is seeking the truth. But whoever is too stubborn and arrogant after proof has been established, then his reckoning will be with his Lord.

We ask Allaah to help us adhere to His Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger until the Day when we will meet Him. May Allaah grant blessings and peace to our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions.

Huqooq al-Nabi (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) bayna al-Ijlaal wa’l-Ikhlaal, p. 139

Shaykh Dr. Saalih ibn Fawzaan al-Fawzaan

Member of the Committee of Senior Scholars, Saudi Arabia.

Turkish and Islamic Works Museum

euraktiva — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:53:00 +0000

Turkish and Islamic Works Museum is the first Turkish museum covering the Turkish and Islamic art works wholly. The establishment works that have been started at the end of 19th century have been completed in 1913 and the museum has been opened for visit in the soup kitchen building located in Süleymaniye Mosque complex, which is one of the most important works of Mimar Sinan, with the name of “Evkaf - ı İslamiyet Müzesi” (Islamic Foundations Museum). After the announcement of the republic, it has taken the name “Turkish and Islamic Works Museum”.
The museum has been moved to İbrahim Pasha Palace from the soup kitchen building in 1983. Ibrahim Pasha Palace, which is one of the most important samples of 16th Century Ottoman civil architecture samples is on the stages of the historical hippodrome, the history of which goes back to the Roman Period. This building, the precise construction reason and date are not known, has been presented to İbrahim Pasha by Kanuni Sultan Süleyman in 1520, who would be his grand vizier for 13 years.
İbrahim Pasha Palace, which is claimed to be bigger and more magnificent than Topkapı Palace by the history has been the stage of many weddings, feasts and celebrations as well as rebellions and turmoil and called with the name of İbrahim Pasha after the death of this person in 1536. It has been used by other grand viziers, and had functions such as barracks, embassy palace, register office, Janissary band house, sewing workshop and prison.
The palace located around four big internal courtyards has been made of stone in contrast with many Ottoman civilian buildings, most of which are wooden, therefore it could reach today and has been repaired between the years 1966 - 1983 and has been born again as the new building of Turkish and Islamic Works Museum. The section, which is used as a museum today is the big ceremony hall of the palace and the 2nd courtyard surrounding it, which have been the subject of all Ottoman miniatures of the palace and the gravures and tables of Western artists.
Turkish and Islamic Works Museum has been awarded with the Special Jury Award of Museum of the Year Competition of the European Council in 1984 and with the prize given by European Council - Unesco for its studies for making the children love the culture inheritance.
Turkish and Islamic Works Museum, that is among the important museums of the world in its class has works from almost all periods and all types of Islamic art with its collection exceeding forty thousand works.
Carpet Section
The carpet section forming the richest collection of carpet art in the world had a separate importance and caused the museum’s being famous as a “Carpet Museum” for long years. The museum has the richest carpet collection of not only Turkey, but also the world. Besides rare Seljuk carpets, prayer rugs and animal figured carpets belonging to the 15th centuries and the carpets produced in Anatolia between the 15th - 17th centuries and called as “Holbein Carpet” in the West inspired by the geometrically figured or kufi writing are the most valuable parts of this section.
Turkish and Islamic Works Museum carpet collection that became richer with Iranian and Caucasian carpets and famous Uşak and palace carpet samples is a reference, which the ones carrying out a serious research on the carpet art in the world must apply to.
Hand Writings and Calligraphy Section
Koran - ı Kerims constituting a big part of the writing collection of Turkish and Islamic Works Museum from 7th century to the 20th century come from a large geographical region where Islam has spread over.
It is one of the rare collections, where Emevi, Abbasi, Egypt and Syria Tulunoğulları, Fatımi, Eyyubi, Memluk, Moğol, Türkmen, Seljuk, Timuri, Safavi, Kaçar and Anatolian Principalities and Ottoman calligraphy creations can be observed all together.
Among the hand writings, except Korans, there are books (some of them with pictures) written about various subjects and these draw attention both in terms of their writing styles and their coatings.
Imperial edicts, warrants bearing the signatures of Ottoman sultans, the sultan’s signatures each of which is a work of art, Turkish and Iranian miniature writings make Turkish and Islamic Works Museum one of the most important museums of the world.
Section of Wooden Works
The most important parts of this collection are the samples of Anatolian Wood art of 9th - 10th century.
Besides the unique parts that remained from the Anatolian Seljuks and principalities, mother - of - pearl, ivory, tortoiseshell ornamented wooden works of the Ottoman Period, unique samples of inlaying art, Koran part cases, bookrests, drawers are the interesting parts of this rich collection.
Stone Art Section
Stone works belonging to Emevi, Abbasi, Memluk, Seljuk, Ottoman periods, some of which have motifs and some of which have figures, but all of which have writings have been gathered in Turkish and Islamic Works Museum. Unique and elite samples of stone art of Seljuk Period, grave stones on which hunting scenes, fairy creatures such as sphinx, griphon, dragon, early - period stone works with kufi writings, inscriptions written in different methods that are projections of Ottoman calligraphy art are important both in quality and in quantity.
Section of Ceramic and Glass
In this collection consisting mostly of the ceramic works found in the excavations made between 1908 - 14, the ones from Samarra, Rakka, Tel Halep, Keşan are in the first ranks.
It is possible to see the stages of Early - Islamic Period ceramic art in the collection of Turkish and Islamic Works Museum. The mosaic, mihrab and wall encaustic tile samples belonging to the Anatolian Principalities and Seljuk Periods and the plaster ornaments of Konya Kılıçaslan Palace constitute another important part of the collection. Ottoman encaustic tile and ceramic art samples end with near - period Kütahya and Çanakkale ceramics.
The glass collection starts with the 9th century Islamic glass art samples and includes 15th century Memluk candles, Ottoman period glass art samples.
Metal Art Section
Turkish and Islamic Works Museum Metal Art Collection starting with the unique samples belonging to the Great Seljuk Empire period and mortar, censer, long - spouted ewer, mirror and dirhems constitute an important collection with the door knockers of Cizre Ulu Mosque and 14th century candelabrums ornamented with constellation and planet symbols, which have an important place in Islamic metal art.
Among the Ottoman metal art samples starting from the 16th century and reaching the 19th century, there are silver, brass, tombac (ornamented with valuable stones) crests, candles, rose water cans, censers, washtub / ewer sets.
Ethnography Section
Ethnographic parts collected for long years have found the possibility of being exhibited with the transfer of Turkish and Islamic Works Museum to İbrahim Pasha Palace.
The youngest part of the museum is exhibited in this collection, consisting of carpet - kilim looms collected from various regions of Anatolia, wool painting techniques, public weaaving and ornamenting art samples, clothes in their regional enhancements, house goods, hand arts, hand art instruments, nomad tents exhibited in places special to them.
Address: Ibrahim Pasa Sarayi At Meydani 46, SultanahmetOperating days and hours: Closed Mondays / 09.00 - 17.00
Gönderen frenzy zaman: 07:33
Etiketler: museum, ottoman art

0 yorum:
Yorum Gönder
Sonraki Yazı Önceki Yazı Ana Sayfa
Kaydol: Yazı Yorumları (Atom)

Hospitals in Islamic Caliphate

euraktiva — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:35:00 +0000

The capital of the Islamic caliphate empire kept changing from one dynasty to another. In each capital, an important medical center developed. Thus, by the end of the 13th century, there were many medical centers spread throughout the Arab world. As this is an expansive subject in history, Space does not allow the description of all the hospitals built throughout these centuries. We, therefore, have chosen some of the important institutions, which will be described according to the region where they were developed in. Ash-ShamAsh-Sham at that time included what is known now as Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine., Damascus and Jerusalem were the important cities. Damascus: The first known hospital in Islam was built in Damascus in 706 A.D. by the Umayyad Caliph, Al-Walid (Hamarneh, 1962). The most important hospital built in Damascus in the middle ages was named An-Nuri Hospital, after King Nur Adl-Din Zinki in 1 156. This hospital was built during the Crusades War, hence the importance of it being built was to fulfill a need for a well-equipped and well-staffed hospital. It turned out to not only be first class in care, but the hospital also was an excellent first class medical school. It is important to understand why books were expensive and limited in number in the middle ages. This was because they were hand-written and because printing was not, in process, used until the middle of the 15th century. Books were hand-written and thus expensive and limited in number. The king donated a whole library rich in medical books to the hospital. The hospital adopted medical records, probably being the first in history. From its medical school, many eminent physicians graduated, for example Ibn Anl-Nafis, the scholar who discovered the pulmonary circulation system. The hospital served the public for seven centuries and parts of it still exist today. Jerusalem : In 1055 A.D., the Crusaders built Saint John’s Hospital. By the end of the 11th century, it expanded to such an extent to include a hospital, a palace for knights, and a convent for the nursing sisters. The medical activities of the hospital were tremendous because of the large number of daily admissions of patients, pilgrims, and wounded soldiers. After the liberation of Jerusalem by Salah ad-Din in 1187 A.D., the hospital was renamed was changed into Al-Salahani Hospital. He expanded the hospital, which continued to serve the people until its destruction by an earthquake in 1458 A.D. Iraq and Persia Baghdad : In 750 A.D., Baghdad was elected and built to be the capital of the Abbasid dynasty by the Caliph Abu-Jaifar Al- Mansur. In 766 A.D., he assigned the dean of the medical school of Jindi Shapur, Judis Ibn-Babtishu’ , to be the court physician and establish hospitals proportionate to the glory and prosperity of Baghdad. When Harun Arl-Rashid followed (786-809 A.D.), he ordered the grandson of Ibn-Babtishu and his court physician, Jibril, to build a special hospital named Baghdad Hospital. This hospital developed into an important medical center. One of its chiefs was Al-Razi, the eminent internist. In 918 A.D., the Caliph Al-Mujgtadir built two hospitals in Baghdad. One was on the east side of the city, which he named Asl-Sayyidah Hospital, after his mother. The other was on the west side of the city, which he named, Al- Mujgtadiri Hospital, after himself. Another important hospital was named Al-Adudi Hospital. It was built in 981 A.D. after King Adud Ald-Dawlah. It was the most magnificent hospital built in Baghdad before modern times. It was built at the request of the Caliph, who wanted to outdo his predecessors. It was furnished with the best logistical equipment and supplies known at the time. It had interns, residents, and 24 consultants attending its professional activities. Haliy Abbas, who wrote the famous book Liber Regius (Al-Malaki), was a member of staff. It was destroyed in 1258 when the Mongols, led by Holagu the grandson of Genghis Khan, invaded Baghdad. EgyptAl-Fustat: In 872 A.D., Ahmed Ibn-Tulun built a hospital called Al-Fustat Hospital in the city Al-Fustat, which is now Old Cairo. It served the growing Cairo population for six centuries. It was divided into separate wards. On admission, the patients were given special apparel while their clothes, money, and valuables were stored until they were at the time of their discharge. Cairo: In 1284 A.D., King Al-Mansur Qalawun built the famous and important hospital named Al-Mansuri Hospital. The story behind its construction is interesting. King Al-Mansur Qalawun was an officer in the Muslim Arabian army fighting the Crusaders. While in the Holy Land, he fell sick and was admitted to An- Nuri Hospital. On recovery, he vowed that if he ever became the ruler of Egypt, he would build a great hospital in Cairo, even more magnificent than An-Nuri Hospital, for, the sick, poor, and rich alike. At the inauguration ceremony, he asked for a cup of lemonade from the fountain, which was normally filled with water. After drinking it he declared that by taking it, he was signifying that the hospital was serving all people from the king to the least of his subjects. (Hamarneh, 1962). This was the best hospital built at that time as reported by the contemporary travelers and historians of that time such as Ibn-Battuta and Al-Kalkashandi. It was divided into different sections according to medical ailments for different diseases. Music therapy was used as a form of therapy treatment for psychiatric patients. It served 4,000 patients daily and the patient’s stay in the hospital was free. Moreover, on his discharge, the patient was given food and money for compensation for being out of work during his hospital stay. Al-Mansuri Hospital has served Cairo for seven centuries since it’s opening has been built. It is now used for ophthalmology and renamed Qalawun Hospital. Its magnificent ancient door is preserved in the Islamic Museum of Cairo. North AfricaTunisia: In 830 A.D., Prince Ziyadat Allah I, built Al-Qayrawan Hospital in a district of the Qayrawan city called Adl-Dimnah. Subsequently all hospitals in Tunisia were called Dimnah instead of Bimaristan as they were called in the East, which is a Persian word meaning a hospital. The Qayrawan Hospital was characterized by spacious separate wards, waiting rooms for visitors patients, and female nurses from Sudan. The hospital also had a prayer hall. Morocco: In 1190 A.D., The king Al-Mansur Ya’qub Ibn-Yusuf built a hospital in the capital city, Marakesh, and named it the Marakesh Hospital. It was a huge hospital beautifully landscaped with fruit trees and flowers. Water entered all the sections through aqueducts. Patients were provided with special apparel: one for winter and another for summer. The pharmacy was taken care of by specialists called the Saydalah and there was an expensive private section where each patient was charged what is equivalent today to $1,501 a day. One thousand years ago, this fee was quite expensive. Andalusia In 1366 A.D., Prince Muhammad Ibn-Yusuf Ibn Nasr built the Granada Hospital in the city of Granada, which had a population of expanded to half a million population. The hospital represented the beauty of Islamic-Arabic architecture in Spain and served the people until the fall of Granada in 1492 A.D http://www.uniquepakistan.com/news/general/hospitals-in-islamic-history-20080308.html
“Faint not nor grieve for you will overcome them if you are(indeed) believers.”[ surah Aal -e-imraan-3, verse 139]
MAY ALLAH BESTOW UPON US THE WILL & POTENCY TO FOLLOW HIS COMMANDS ameen

The Forgotten Oil War In Sudan

euraktiva — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:12:00 +0000

By Abdus Sattar Ghazali

07 March, 2008
Countercurrents.org

“The issue of oil in Darfur isn’t very different from the issue of oil anywhere else,” says Mike Aaronson, director general of British NGO Save the Children. “It’s potentially a tremendous blessing, and potentially a tremendous handicap. It’s not without reason that people talk about the oil curse. The reality is that many countries that have the greatest mineral wealth are also the ones with the conflicts.”
Oil Discovery Adds New Twist to Darfur Tragedy By Ruth Gidley - June 15, 2005

The forgotten oil war in Sudan is again in news. Fresh clashes between Sudan People’s Liberation Movement units and fighters from the Misseriya community in the oil-rich Abyei region have left scores dead and the two sides trading blame over who was responsible for the latest skirmishes.

The deadly clashes in the volatile Abyei region provoke fears of renewed conflict as tension between the north and south as vicious tug-of-war continues over rights to the Abyei region.

Fighting in the north-south border region of Abyei stopped following the signing of the January 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which ended 21 years of war that reportedly claimed the lives of an estimated two million people and displaced some four million.

The relative quiet has facilitated the exploitation of oil reserves in the region. U.S. oil companies have known about Sudan’s oil wealth since the 1970s when Chevron discovered big oil reserves in the south. The corporation estimated that “Sudan had more oil than Iran and Saudi Arabia together.”

Tellingly, just as the long war in southern Sudan drew to an uneasy close, rebels in the western region of Darfur, organized in the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/SLA) and Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), rose up against Khartoum, in 2003. The rebel groups have ties with pro-west former rebels in southern Sudan who fought a decades-long civil war against the central government. The war in Darfur did not come out of the blue, of course. It is known to have major yet untapped substantial oil reserves. Sudan announced in April 2005 that its ABCO corporation – which is 37 percent owned by Swiss company Clivenden – had begun drilling for oil in Darfur.

The mass media in the Britain and France and US writes a great deal about the suffering in the Darfur region. But it writes very little about the economic interests these three countries have in the oil recently discovered in this part of Africa.

The corporate oil companies and the Pentagon cannot justify an intervention against Sudan based on wanting to dominate the country’s natural resources. They must resort to humanitarian slogans. “Stop Genocide” or “Protect the Rights of Ethnic Minorities” has a better ring.

People in the United States and the West have been bombarded regularly with the alleged crimes committed by the Sudanese government. By most media accounts, at least 200,000 people have died in Sudan’s Darfur region since the conflict began in 2003.

Whatever the real numbers are, no doubt there is a humanitarian crisis. Lack of food, water and arable land in the region has contributed to the situation. But even the United Nations acknowledges that the conflict is not “genocide.” A five-man panel UN mission led by Italian Judge Antonio Cassese reported in 2004 that genocide had not been committed in Darfur, rather grave human rights abuses were committed. It is a war stemming from the economic realities of Sudan.

The Bush administration, insisting that genocide has been going on in Darfur since 2003, has sought deployment of United Nations peacekeepers in Darfur to replace an ineffective African Union force. Sudan resisted the U.N. troops until President Bush announced on May 29, 2007, that he was imposing new unilateral economic sanctions against Sudan for failing to allow the deployment and end its support for the janjaweed militia. Three weeks later, Sudan announced it had reached a deal with the United Nations to allow an international force of 20,000 troops to shore up a struggling 7,000-member African Union force.

The United States has maintained a trade embargo against Sudan since 1997, so there is no legal U.S. investment in the country. Cliveden, the biggest stakeholder in ABCO corporation (exploring oil in Darfur), is a Swiss company, but an investigation for British television Channel 4 revealed that Cliveden’s chief executive, Friedholm Eronat, swapped his U.S. passport for a British one shortly before signing an oil deal with the Khartoum government in October 2003.

Chinese connection

China’s oil-related diplomacy is another major factor in the US-Sudan relations. China is Sudan’s largest investor and buys 80 percent of its oil output. Washington accuses Beijing of trying to “secure oil at the sources,” something Washington foreign policy has itself been preoccupied with for at least a Century.

The US sees China as their growing competitor for Sudan’s oil. China has helped Sudan build up its oil exporting industry independently of the US. Not surprisingly, allowing a rival world power such as China to influence an African country with major oil supplies flies in the face of the U.S. goal of outright control of the world’s major oil resources.

Beijing’s China National Petroleum Company, CNPC, is Sudan’s largest foreign investor, with some $5 billion in oil field development. Since 1999 China has invested at least $15 billion in Sudan. It owns 50% of an oil refinery near Khartoum with the Sudan government.

China plays a different role in Sudan and other African countries. China has actually helped Sudan’s economic development while serving its own needs for oil. With its more than $1.3 trillion in mainly US dollar reserves, China has been generous in dispensing its soft loans, with no interest or outright grants to some of the poorest debtor states of Africa. The loans have gone to infrastructure including highways, hospitals, and schools, a stark contrast to the brutal austerity demands of the IMF and World Bank. In 2006 China committed more than $8 billion to Nigeria, Angola and Mozambique, versus $2.3 billion to all sub-Saharan Africa from the World Bank. Unlike the World Bank, a de facto arm of US foreign economic policy, China attaches no strings to its loans.

Tellingly, African countries have now begun to argue that the World Bank and the IMF have become irrelevant to them because they can get aid packages and investment from China without the strings that are attached to money from the US-backed international financial organizations.

US Covert Operations

The war in Sudan involves both US covert operations and US trained “rebel” factions coming in from South Sudan, Chad, Ethiopia and Uganda. F. William Engdahl, author of the book, ‘A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order,’ provides an insight into the covert US operations in southern Sudan and Darfur:

“The United States, acting through surrogate allies in Chad and neighboring states has trained and armed the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Army, headed until his death in July 2005, by John Garang, trained at US Special Forces school at Fort Benning, Georgia.

“By pouring arms into first southern Sudan in the eastern part and since discovery of oil in Darfur, to that region as well, Washington fuelled the conflict that led to tens of thousands dying and several million driven to flee their homes. Eritrea hosts and supports the SPLA, the umbrella NDA opposition group, and the Eastern Front and Darfur rebels.

“The Pentagon has been busy training African military officers in the US, much as it has for Latin American officers for decades. Its International Military Education and Training (IMET) program has provided training to military officers from Chad, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Cameroon and the Central African Republic, in effect every country on Sudan’s border. Much of the arms that have fuelled the killing in Darfur and the south have been brought in via murky, protected private “merchants of death” such as the notorious former KGB operative, now with offices in the US, Victor Bout. Bout has been cited repeatedly in recent years for selling weapons across Africa. US Government officials strangely leave his operations in Texas and Florida untouched despite the fact he is on the Interpol wanted list for money laundering.

“US development aid for all Sub-Sahara Africa including Chad, has been cut sharply in recent years while its military aid has risen. Oil and the scramble for strategic raw materials is the clear reason. The region of southern Sudan from the Upper Nile to the borders of Chad is rich in oil. Washington knew that long before the Sudanese government.”

It is known that Ethiopia is one of the most active countries in the 21-year long north-south war.
Eritrea is suspected of having supported the Beja separatist movements in the northeastern part of Sudan. Uganda, which claims that Khartoum supports the God’s Resistance Army that fights against the Ugandan administration, is reportedly among the countries that help the opposition groups in Sudan.

There are more than 80 ethnic/religious groups among the 7 million inhabitants of Darfur. Some groups have kin relationships with neighboring country, Chad. Chad President Idris Deby is a member of the Zaghawa tribe in Darfur. It is stated that three presidents, who held power in Chad, directed their fights from Darfur.

According to Engdahl, the present concern of the current Washington Administration over Darfur in southern Sudan is not, if we were to look closely, genuine concern over genocide against the peoples in that poorest of poor part of a forsaken section of Africa. No. “It’s the oil, stupid.”

Sudan is Africa’s largest geographical state, nearly a third the size of the United States, with a small population of only 30 million.

Abdus Sattar Ghazali is the Executive Editor of the online magazine American Muslim Perspective: www.amperspective.com E-Mail: asghazali@gmail.com

"Fundamentals of Human Rights" Simplified educational booklet by the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information

euraktiva — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:11:00 +0000

Cairo, March 8, 2008

The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information released a new booklet titled “Fundamentals of Human Rights“. It is an educational simplified booklet for understanding the basics of human rights and its fundamentals.

The 110 pages booklet is providing a simple image to the Arab audience about the essence, origin and terminology of human rights, that it includes models and examples of some international, Arab and Egyptian human rights organizations working in the field of human rights.

This booklet is trying to answer questions suggested by volunteers and those interested in human rights, and to refute what is commonly rumored about human right organizations and Arab activists such as “funding, western support, domestic privacy vs. universality, corruption, struggle with Arab governments, the relation to religions” and such enquiries or accusations raised by some in bad or well-meaning.

This booklet is the result of cooperation among a number of human rights activists and volunteers in human rights from Egypt and some other Arab countries. The booklet is trying to close aspects of human rights to the audience of non specialists who need to know more about human rights and how to volunteer within. The booklet prepared by:

Nazar Abdelgadir: Director of Geneva Institute for Human Rights,
Mahmoud Kandeel: lawyer and human rights activist,
Sally Sami: human rights activist,
Gamal Eid: lawyer and director of the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information,
In addition to a number of volunteers from 9 Arab countries.
Copies of this booklet are available in the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information as well as an electronic copy can be downloaded from the website http://gohod.net which is a new initiative by the Arabic Network to support the voluntary efforts exerted to serve the human rights movement & issues in the Arab world.
The address of the Arabic Network: 5, , road 105, El-Horyya Sq, Maadi, Cairo.
Tel: +202 25249544.

THEOLOGY VS IDEOLOGY

euraktiva — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:40:00 +0000

These times- this week- and the coming week after that is a time in which two cultures or two (what is called) “religions” come into contact within a religious confluence of holidays. In the Christian-Euro-American societies there is an ostensible celebration of Christmas; in the Islamic context there is the observation of (whatever is left of the meanings of) the Hajj; there are some clarifications in order within this time of convergence with two sets of minds or people trying to live up to their religious (as it were) standards. It is almost ridiculous to remind ourselves and whoever is listening that Allah is One- there is no duality or multiplicity about Him, whether that pertains to His Essence or Attributes- the fact is established.

Say: It is He, Allah, the Singular, the Unique; the Independent, the In-defatigueable, Who has not given physical birth and Who has not received physical birth; And Who is not matched by anything or anyone, and is not similar to anything or anyone. (Surah Ikhlaas)

There is no birth description or explanation to Him- all attempts, whether they are theological, philosophical, conceptual or mental in trying to place Allah in a position, (whatever that may be), vis-a-vis being given life or attaining life or begetting life is from Allah’s words nonsensical and unacceptable. This is a given that all Muslims understand as a matter of fact. That being said, we, (Muslims), err; we make a mistake when we try to take those who believe erroneously in the concept of a trinity to task and begin to break our human relationships with them just because of this serious theological error. We don’t know of Allah’s Prophet, (he is our pace-setter) , having any negative, acrimonious or hostile feelings or relationship with those who believe in a trinity- this never appears in reading the Seerah and Sunnah of the Prophet. We know of his encounter with Christian clergymen and we know of the ayaat that Allah has revealed in the Qur’an pertaining to this fact i.e. Allah’s Tawheed or Unity- the ayaat are abundant but they do not diffuse to us- on this political issue- a sense of hostility towards those who believe in one way, definition or another in a God that is not One. There is, (though), a development that occurs from this misplaced belief that the Christians have that becomes so serious that we cannot dismiss or diminish it- this development is the usurpation of Allah’s Authority. This is a very serious sin and a very offensive infraction of the Tawheed of Allah. The serious infraction of the Tawheed of Allah is not their erroneous belief which we acknowledge and know; the serious violation of Allah’s Wahdaniyah and Tawheed is that they usurp his Authority and claim it for themselves. This is where and when there is a notion of serious objection and even animosity towards those who have misplaced Allah’s Authority and claimed it themselves. Allah says

He does not withhold or forbid you from a relationship of virtue and fairness and equity towards those who are not fighting you because of your Deen or who are not waging war against you because of your Deen and who do not expel you from your homelands and who are not complicit in expelling you from your homelands and countries (Surah Al Mumtahanah verse

If we wanted to soothe the translation: the ayah and Allah is telling us that you should be as forthcoming, accommodating and courteous as you can be towards everyone except those who are involved in acts of war and hostilities because of your adherence to Allah’s Deen and in the process they are rendering you refugees, expatriates, misplaced populations or they are a party to that process- this is what the ayah is saying; it’s not saying that we should show our political and military muscles to those who have a theological misunderstanding of Allah. To the contrary, if we are confident of the information and knowledge that Allah has privileged us with, we should feel sorry for them- not hostile towards them. If they are theologically wrong they need care- they need people who can show them the confidence and certainty that they don’t have which comes from what we are supposed to have. With these ayaat on your mind, you (should) take a look at the world around us- are we in a behavioral sense exemplifying the meanings of these ayaat. Allah says

Say (O Prophet of Allah): O People of Scripture… (Surah Aal Imran verse 64)

When we speak to Ahl Kitaab with the confidence and certitude that we have- by the formulation of the words Yaa Ahl Kitaab- we show sympathy towards them. It’s not the psychology that permeates today among Muslims to try to curry favor with them. There’s a difference between saying Yaa Ahl Kitaab when you’re psychologically inferior (as happens to be the case with many Muslims today), or when you are psychologically healthy and exude the confidence to feel sorry and sympathy for them, (as is appropriately the case). Allah says to us, in adjusting this relationship, as He says to His Prophet

…Come to a word of balance, fairness, accommodation or an idea of equilibrium between us and you (Surah Aal Imran verse 64)

What is this? We’re going to notice that what is to follow is going to be a concentration on the meaning of Allah’s Authority

…that we shall not conform to or confirm in our relationship anyone as Authority except Allah (Surah Aal Imran verse 64)

The word na’bud is not the worship! This is what happens to our minds and psychologies when we borrow secular terminology to fill-in the meanings of the Qur’an

And we shall not associate anyone with Him at this level (Surah Aal Imran verse 64)

We have to remind a world that is burdened by the secular explanation of scripture that people tend to associate others with Allah as far as His Hukm (Surah Al Kahf verse 26) and Mulk (Surah Al Isra’ verse 111) are concerned and it took straight words from Allah to dispel this historical practice. Shirk by and large pertains to two descriptions- Al Hukm and Al Mulk. Do you need that to be broken down more? These are Allah’s words- brothers and sisters…

And that none of us should designate others of us as- arbaab- Sustainers to the exclusion of Allah or in competition with Allah (Surah Aal Imran verse 64)

How much more explanation do Muslims need to have them liberated from the misnomers, mistranslations and misunderstanding when it comes to this relationship between those who say that they are Muslims and those who say they are Christians? If these people in the world around would honor their biblical Prophets and open their minds to these ayaat, they would have no choice but to say, (at least in theory and within their own way of thinking), that the Muslims are more Christian and Judaic than they are! But, it seems that we contribute to the problem of prejudice and discrimination that they have and we don’t offer a solution to that problem because we reinforce it with the inaccurate and biased notions that we have; hence, we have Muslims who are trying to stir the pot of animosity because of theological issues and Allah’s Prophet did no such thing. If there is going to be a polarization of positions- that should be because of the authority of Allah that they are violating and many of us are not able to stand up for.

And that none of us should designate others of us as- arbaab- Sustainers to the exclusion of Allah or in competition with Allah (Surah Aal Imran verse 64)

Brothers and sisters, committed Muslims…

The combination of “when traditions become Islam and when customs and conventions become Imaan” becomes a package that is very difficult to untangle. We grow up going to Masajid and listening to khutab that have made many Muslims. We hear about this almost every religious season- some Muslims around the world attack Temples, churches or even synagogues. It is in the same direction that we have officialdoms, regimes and governments who try to intensify the theological differences so that they can get away with their political crimes. What harm is going to happen to any government if they can get Muslims and Christians to fight against each other and not have the common attention of good-willing Muslims and Christians against their high crimes and misdemeanors. It is in this vein that we have an understanding of Islam today that makes it a crime, (this was in the news just this past week)… A British lady wanted to take the Bible to Arabia and she was told “she cannot take the Bible to Arabia.” Why? Because she was told “this is the Islamic standard of things.” Where did this come from?! The Bible was there during the time of Allah’s Prophet; he didn’t say you cannot have this Bible in Arabia. People had this Bible in the Southern, Northern, Eastern parts of Arabia and in Al Hejaz itself. There were Christians and jews who were reading their versions of the Bible in Makkah and Al Medinah. When the Prophet 1^st received revelation- Al Wahy- he went to a reader of the Bible- ibn Nawfal; this was a Christian. When the Wahy began to flow later on to the Prophet, he didn’t go and say “you cannot read your Bible.” It never occurred. Even with all of the difficulties that we have with the political impulse of the jews, especially in Al Medinah, Allah’s Prophet didn’t say to them you can’t read or have your Bible.” It never happened. When the Christians came to him from Southern Arabia he didn’t say “you’re living in Arabia you can’t read the Bible.” It’s unheard of. Anyone who understands Allah’s book and Allah’s Prophet will tell you that to discourage Christians from becoming “religiously and morally Christian” is a violation of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. An ayah in the Qur’an places the people of scripture under the standards of their own scripture; we are responsible for that and we can’t be responsible for that by sending out the notion to these people that we don’t permit them to read their Holy book in our Holy Land- this doesn’t make any sense. (It is) true- the Prophet of Allah said two deens cannot co-exist in Al Jazeera or the Peninsular- the same territory and Holy Land that we are talking about; but deen is not a word that means “religion, creed or belief”; deen is a system or overall organization in a position of submission to Allah of worldly affairs; therefore this current government that is occupying Al Hejaz, Al Jazeerah, Makkah and Al Medinah is criminal by saying to people of faith and conviction that “you cannot improve your faith and conviction by reading your Holy book; therefore according to the Saudi Arabian government, (for those who don’t understand what we’re saying), it is haram to bring your Bible to Saudi Arabia but it is halal to bring bombs to Arabia.” (Do) you see how they undermine this message of Islam?! It all goes back to the theological and the ideological; we are supposed to take a theological argument against Christians and jews according to the Saudis- not according to the Qur’an and the Prophet; and we are supposed to look the other way when it comes to ideology and the military; so we live satisfied with a false idea and understanding that no Bibles can go to Arabia but you can have militaries, military bases, weapons of mass destruction and areas that are occupied- all of that is permissible according to this understanding and false interpretation of Allah’s and His Prophets words- this is where we are. For those who are going, on their way to the Hajj or already in Makkah and Al Medinah, this is the type of environment and climate that you are honoring through your traditions. No one is supposed to speak the truth to this travesty of justice and express the ayaat and ahadith on these flagrant violations of ayaat and ahadith! You’re supposed to go to Makkah and Al Medinah silent; repeating words without meanings and meeting human beings that might as well be skeletons and mummies instead of being the coordinated and consolidated base that we are supposed to be i.e. Ummatan Wasata- an Ummah of centrality; instead we are not only divided in our societies, but we are also shattered in our concepts and ideas and they want us to remain shattered in our concepts and ideas. These people who are supposedly running the affairs of the Hajj and Umrah are the ones who are responsible for sowing the seeds of hostility in the world against innocent human beings and letting the big crooks off the hook, they themselves included.

O Allah- expedite the day and time when they will be exposed along with their masters and minions.