Madina Archives

Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board

Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jannah
02/14/01 at 16:18:54
This is a forward: As salamun alaikum, Today, on the Oprah show, muslim women were yet again misrepresented as being oppressed.  There is an opportunity for us to appear on the Oprah show to portray what Muslims are really about.  There is an upcoming show about   Do you feel restricted by cultural traditions? RESTRICTIVE CULTURAL TRADITIONS LIKE ARRANGED MARRIAGES..... We need muslim couples who are interested in appearing on the show.  So i am including the show excerpt and my letter which i will email to Oprah.  If you want to appear on the show to represent Islam properly, please contact me at muslimsonoprah@yahoo.com http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/tows_past_20010209.html http://www.oprah.com/tows/intheworks/plugs_547.html Actually, I will be writing a proposal to Oprah asking her to invite leaders and scholars from Muslim community and have a specific show just on Islam and the common misconceptions about Islam and Muslims.  If anyone would like to help me present this proposal to Oprah and our leaders and scholars, please contact me. Thanks. Exerpt from Oprah's web site: ---------------------- Are you a woman whose cultural traditions restrict you from living the life you want? For example, does your culture require your parents to arrange your marriage and forbid you from choosing your husband? Or, have you faced severe consequences for not abiding by strict traditions for women in your native country? The Oprah Show will be talking to women whose cultural rituals restrict them from personal freedom. Have you faced turning your back on your family and your country so you can live a full life and be true to yourself? If your parents are planning or wanting to arrange a marriage for you, please let us know. Has an arranged marriage ruined your life or was it the best thing that ever happened to you? We'd like to hear about your experience, so please share your story with us. Don't forget to include both a daytime AND evening telephone number in case our producers need to contact you for more information. ------------------------My E-Mail to Oprah ------------------------------------- Dear Oprah, This is a great idea for a show, but I have some concerns about it.  I am a Muslim woman and I know that Muslim women are perceived as being oppressed as indicated by Oprah episodes such as “Uniting Women of the World, February 9, 2001.”  I will not deny that a lot of women are oppressed in some countries and I am completely against that, but the media has a way of presenting a very biased story.  I would like to be on your show to represent the other side of the story…to present my self as a practicing Muslim woman who enjoys all my freedoms, not because America gives them to me, but because Islam does.  Islam gives me the freedom to choose my own husband, own and manage my own property, vote, receive inheritance, work, get an education, and preserve my modesty by covering my self.  I am tired of people thinking that I am oppressed simply because I am a Muslim woman.  Shows such as “Uniting Women of the World”, although accomplishing great things, also add to the misconceptions of all Muslim women and Islam as a whole.  When the media wants to cover topics such as this, the staff should undergo some kind of diversity training.  This way, the sensitivity level of these shows would be increased and would be apparent by the emphasis placed on explaining that this is not the case with all Muslims and Islam certainly does not condone this.  The repercussions of shows such as this even lead to hate crimes against Muslims in this country and one can find a long list of them by contacting C.A.I.R. (Council on American Islamic Relations).   There are plenty of Muslim couples whoare married by the “arranged marriage” method and i believe that the “arranged marriage” is a superior alternative to dating followed by marriage.  But the term “arranged marriage” needs to be defined.  I grew up in this country and only several years ago, I was vehemently against this idea of “arranged marriages.”   That was because the only thing that I was exposed to was dating and I didn’t understand how one can marry someone without dating them.  Let me define the Islamic concept of “arranged marriage.”  According to Islamic law, a woman must consent to a marriage before it can take place.  Therefore, no one can force her to marry someone she doesn’t want to.  What does happen is the parents, along with the rest of the Muslim community try to find their son or daughter a suitable match.  If the parents or friends hear of a potential match, they introduce the two.  The guy and girl are not allowed to be alone together, nor can they do anything physical, not even holding hands.  They are allowed to get to know each other by asking each other questions and speaking in a public setting.  The reason they are not allowed to be alone is to protect the woman from any unwanted advances from the man and to protect both of them from committing a sin since premarital intimacy is considered a sin.  If the two, after getting to know each other in a public environment, decide that they share similar beliefs, values, and goals, and they are comfortable with each others personalities and looks, they can get married. The reason some marriages don’t work is not because of traditions, culture or religion.  Rather, it is because either the couple are not the right match for each other, or at least one of them hasn’t put enough effort into making it work.        Therefore, in order to present an unbiased view of this shows topic to the public, I would like to appear on your show along with some other Muslims who would have interesting stories to share.  Please contact me and I will be happy to tell you more and also help find other Muslim couples and women who will help give a fair view of these so called “restrictive cultural traditions.”                                                         Thanks.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Zahra
02/11/01 at 01:57:22
slm May Allah reward you for your efforts, Jannah, in relieving common misconceptions among non-Muslims.  I just wanted to suggest one thing in regards to your letter, if you don't mind.  Oprah does not, as far as I understand, explicitly attribute these crimes to Muslims.  She talks about women in Muslim countries and shows pictures of women in hijab but she does not explicity say, "these Muslim women are oppressed..."  Of course, though, the images people get are of Muslim women.  My suggestion is-I think you should explain further how the images she produces are implications towards Muslim women-why people would attribute Islam to those women.  She may read your letter and say, "Well, I'm not talking about Muslim women, I'm talking  about women who are oppressed all over the world. I've never said a word against Muslim women"  I think you need to explain to her WHY and HOW she is in fact, talking about Muslim women and prove to her how she is causing the public to grasp images of Muslim women that are completely unrelated to Islam.   May Allah allow you much success in your endeavor.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
bhaloo
02/11/01 at 03:18:22
slm Jannah is going to be on Oprah?  ??? Woah

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jannah
02/11/01 at 09:29:02
Woahhh all news to me :)  This is just a forward from someone. You can contact the Oprah show directly from the URL they gave. I don't know who the original author was. wlm

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/11/01 at 14:28:46
I’m against it…. the kaffar have an agenda. They will never show Islam on a good light. This is for the same reason they never showed communism in a good light during the cold war and they never showed fascism in a good light during the Second World War. Journalist and TV presenters don’t base their programs on fact, rather they decide what they want to portray before hand, then try and find facts to back it up. Kind of like how a drunk uses a lamppost, he does not use it for enlightenment but for support. The kaffar will only invite knowledgeable Muslims if they think they can use them to make Islam look bad. Its easy to use them as the TV presenter chooses what questions are asked and the TV Company chooses what seens will be shown and what will be cut. There are plenty of times Muslims, some of whom I know personally have been conned in to taking part in these TV shows, thinking they can show Islam positively, it has never happened and will never happen. The TV shows cut all seens that may show Islam positively and ask questions and arrange the answer in a way to make Islam look as bad as possible. I have never seen any thing on TV that tries to show Islam in a good light. Programs that claim to be showing Islam positively are the worst, as they show a particular kind of Islam, one where things that kaffar hate about Islam have been removed, or how they call it,” reinterpreted”.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jannah
02/11/01 at 18:20:30
slm, jehad it's interesting you say that but i'm not sure I agree.  this is an interesting discussion... while it's true that there are very few if any media shows that have depicted islam in a good way, there are still some. how would you explain ted koppels 98 hajj nightline or the recent yusuf islam vh1 documentary. they were excellent and showed islam in a good light. i think we just have to be smarter in our pr and how we do things. the media, magazines, tv , the computer are all vehicles that we should learn how to manipulate for OUR own agenda.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/13/01 at 07:47:58
Walakum salam wa rahmatula wabarakatihi. I can't really comment on the two programs that you have mentioned specifically, cause I haven't seen them. I am not from America, I'm from England. What I do know is there have been very many programs here that if seen would give the impression to people that Islam is great, the problem with them is that the religion they depict as being Islam, is not Islam. It is a made up religion that they call Islam. It is no more the religion that was revealed to our prophet Mohammed pbh then Christianity is the religion of Jesus. They call it the tolerant face of Islam, moderate Islam or modern Islam etc. This is a two pronged attack where on the one side they attack Muslims with a mixture of truth and falsehood and on the other hand they defend Islam with a mixture of truth and falsehood. Example: They will say that Muslims force non Muslims to become Muslim by force and in Islam women have to cover so Islam is bad. Then some one else will say Islam is not like that, that is extremist Islam, in true Islam they don't force people to become Muslim and women don't have to cover. This method is how corrupt ideas infiltrated the Muslim world. I agree with you that we must use all means at our disposal to spread our way. But the fact is that kaffar controlled media is not at our disposal, they are controlled by people with a agenda, they are trying to get the people to think in a way that they want them to think in. There may be occasions they may show things that are good for us, this is just like incidents where kaffar kill kaffar in the battle field of jihad due to friendly fire. The media is a weapon that they use against all their enemies. We can try to use their weapons against them, but we must be realistic. And not just attend TV shows for the purpose of attending them. The TV produces and directors are employees, they want to keep their jobs. And the TV channels want to keep their advertising contracts, and their licenses to broadcast. It's a fact that if they show Islam in its true light they will loss these things, with the excuse that they are pandering to Islamic extremists, or legitimising terrorism. We all remember the communist which hunts that went on in America to hunt down people who are suspected of holding communist sympathise. Now that communism is dead, which hunts have not ended, just the targets have changed. Even internet service providers while allowing perverts of all forms to advertise their perversion have oftion banned Islamic sights, or at the very least restrict their content. It is a fact that some service provider do let Muslims say what they want, but they are hounded by kufr governments and organisations until they ban or at least restrict the content of the offending sights. Do you remember awhile back I asked you about a sight about the qouts from the tolmoud where jews are told they can kill, steal and do other stuff  to non-jews? I found it, it said it had changed address many times due to service providers removing their net space due to pressure from the kaffar. There is only one way we can use the media affectively, that is if we controle it. The only way that is possible is if we controle the country that the media company is based in.  It's a fact that the kaffar keep ranting on about how they love freedom of speech, this is a lie, they don't love it, they only love people having the right to say things they don't mind them saying. If we have a Islamic state, then and only then can we have a truly Islamic media, and this goes for all the other things Muslims need. Propaganda has existed as long as civilisations have existed. Every nation has created and nurtured a media, this is for the purpose of brainwashing the population. If we do use their media for our purposes, they will change the way their media is run to prevent us from doing so again.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
UmmZaid
02/14/01 at 14:53:45
Salaam 'Alaikum A good effort, but I think pointless.  Oprah Winfrey will never do anything to show Muslims in a positive light, unless those Muslims are uncovered, like the Zaynab character she had on her "sanctioned violence" show.  Noooo, she doesn't specifically say "This is Islam, and these are Muslims," but... It's there.  Remember the aya that says that they will not be happy with you until you follow their millah? That is Oprah.  She doesn't ever want her audience to know that there are people finding spiritual fulfillment outside of Gary Zucov or whoever the Guru of the Day is, people who are happy living by a set of rules instaed of "if it feels good do it." Sorry, I jsut have an Oprah thing. She creeps me out, and the fact that she let Eve Ensler and some others come on there and make false statements about Afghanistan and that she promotes a group like RAWA... the fact that she talks about oppression in Bangladesh while showing images of ARAB women in Hijab... she's not ignorant, she knows exactly what she's doing, but we're all the same to her.  You know how she is heavily involved  in this V-Day thing at Madison Sq. Garden the other day? Check out their website... one of the groups they gave an award to is a group called "Muslim Women Under Islamic Laws" or something... basically a group of uppity women who want to do away with any form of Islamic law in their own countries, complaining about how oppressive Islam is.  Thanks, but no thanks. Truth stands clear from error, and if someone who watches Oprah wants to sincerely know the truth, Allah will give it to them.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jannah
02/14/01 at 16:17:49
Assalaamu Alaikum, I was listening to alot of the hype surrounding V Day on the radio this morning. (Democracy Now on WRPI) They had quite a few women on who sounded Muslim speaking about FGM.  At this event I'm sure they also had a plethora of those anti-islam, modernist organizations who take it upon themselves to fight against the "oppression" of women in the muslim world. At this point I think there is an extreme need for mainstream good Muslim women to be part of these organizations or start their own in order to portray correct Islamic views and fight the cultural backwardness in many 'muslim' countries. This needs to be done immediately because the only thing these organizations are mass marketing to the world is that islam is equal to oppression of women and we must fight oppressive islamic laws and 'modernize' all these backwards women.   Unfortunately, these organizations are only stepping into the vacuum that exists because in reality the oppression of women and muslim women in particular is not being addressed by the muslim leadership or activists in this country and beyond. We are still arguing over whether women can address an audience or enter a mosque let alone encouraging them to start grassroots movements to fight the diseases which will eat at this ummah until it is gone. It is no wonder that these women turn to (or turn into?) non-muslims to fight against this, since this is all they see of Islam. Ironic isn't it that while those who confuse islam and culture fight against Islam while others who say they are for Islam fight to keep islam and culture forever together.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Ikani
02/14/01 at 19:03:16
Assalamu alaikum, I found this page and and went through the list of links there (bottom of the page - 'The Islamic Women's Home Page' ) http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/islam/islam.shtml

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jannah
02/14/01 at 20:59:07
huh?

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Asim
02/14/01 at 23:46:07
Assalaamu alaikum, Hahahaha..! Ikani who are you proffering that site to?! Jannah created that page and it is on this very site! [quote] At this point I think there is an extreme need for mainstream good Muslim women to be part of these organizations or start their own in order to portray correct Islamic views and fight the cultural backwardness in many 'muslim' countries.[/quote] I think the need is for a general revival of Islam and its disassociation from unIslamic cultural practices. Both men and women have to be involved in this. Women organizations that exist today are reactionary and have almost no influence on men who are the primary cause of oppression of women. In fact, these organizations 'liberate' women into unIslamic ways. Yes, more mainstream women need to participate but men also should and the focus should be more general. I don't think there are any shortcuts. [quote]It is no wonder that these women turn to (or turn into?) non-muslims to fight against this, since this is all they see of Islam. Ironic isn't it that while those who confuse islam and culture fight against Islam while others who say they are for Islam fight to keep islam and culture forever together.[/quote] Well said Jannah. Wasalaam.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Ikani
02/15/01 at 00:01:37
Assalamu alaikum, I know who made the page, Asim. Just was amused that the BBC's actually using it too. :)

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/15/01 at 06:44:58
Asalm walakum, Jannah!!!!!!!!   There is only one reason there are so many kufr NGOs in the Muslim world, that is cause they are sent there by kaffar governments to spread corruption. It is not due to a vacuum.   It is true that women live in poverty and women are backward in Muslim countries, This may come as a shock, but so are men! It is not only the social system of Muslim countries that is messed up. Every aspect of life in the Muslim world is messed up, and from some one who has just come back from the middle east, things are getting worse. The reason why the Muslim world is so messed up is that it is run by leaders who are loyal to the kaffar, not their populations. These leaders want their countries to remain backward, existing only to provide raw materials and cheep sweat shop labour for the kufr west. The reason why the west so loves these women's organisations who go to the Muslim world to liberate Women from the honour of being a mother and a wife is more workers means cheaper wages and more labourers in the sweatshops and cheaper prostitutes to cater for the tourist trade that the governments in the Muslim World are so eager to encourage. The solution to this problem is not education, education is a useless waist of time if there is nothing you can use this education for. When I was in the middle east I was driven around by some of the most educated taxi drivers in the world. A lot of Muslim women in the west are brainwashed by the western media in to thinking that the reason why Muslim women in the Muslim world are in such a bad state is due to cultural backwardness. The fact is this state of affairs is not limited to the Muslim world, It exists in all the nations of the world whose governments are controlled by other states. The difference with the Muslim world is due to our "cultural backwardness",  and our insistence on the Women's roles being primarily a wife and a mother, not only does it mean that it is harder to fill sweatshops, but also unlike Southeast Asian, Latin American and East European countries, the local market in Muslim countries can not provide enough prostitute to cater for the demands of the local tourist trade, so at great expenses Prostitutes have to be imported from eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union during the tourist season. It is true that parents in a lot of Muslim countries are less willing to send their daughters to get educated then their sons, this is less to do with cultural backwardness and more to do with the fact that educational institutions in a lot of Muslim countries are nothing but brainwashing centres and often women being present involves them committing harram, due to reasons of freemixing and hijab. Remember the education institutions in a lot of Muslim countries have the primary role of brainwashing the population. You have to also remember that we are not talking about the rich western countries here, what use is higher education when there are no jobs to go in to? You have to remember that in a lot of countries professionals get paid less then shoe salesmen. Polygamy is less common in the Muslim world now, this combined with the fact that a lot of men leave the Muslim countries to find work elsewhere means that a women trying to get educated risks not getting married before her sell by date has passed. This may seem cruel but this is how it is. No father wants to see his daughter live alone all her life due to her learning stuff she has no way of using. When there are a lot more men then women men get picky and may consider a girl in her twenties as a old maid. The way to solve the problems of the Muslim world is not to set up Islamic groups that are a Islamised version of Kufr groups, but to have a government that does what it is supposed to do. It is the job of the Government to solve oppression on all its citizens, including women, in all affairs including social, from all evils including cultural. No organisation is capable of doing the job of the state, and when the states does not want these jobs to be done, the state will ban the organisation as soon as it thinks it will have a positive effect. So if any of you want to improve the states of women and non-women in the Muslim world, don't cry about it, tears are a waist of water, remove the kufr governments that are causing these problems and replace them with the Khilafah that can solve them.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Nazia
02/15/01 at 13:58:18
slm, I don't understand why we feel that unless we have the *most* effective solution to a problem, we shouldn't do anything at all.  Who cares if the whole world doesn't slap their knees and say, "OH! now we understand Islam, thanks Oprah"?? Its all about trial and error, we see which methods work more and we improve upon them.  We see which methods are ineffective, and we drop them.  NO ONE can claim that bringing Muslims into the public eye is ineffective.  And yes, I know what you're thinking--We won't be presented in a positive light, so its actually counter productive. But does that mean we stop?? Does that mean we ACCEPT the fact that the media makes us look like crap? NO! It means we KEEP appearing on talk shows/news/etc until we DO get the respect we deserve.  If you're taking a class, and you fail the first exam, do you drop the class and move on to something else?? NO, you kick it into high gear and study like theres no tomorrow for the next exam.  And maybe you won't come out with an A, but the truth is you'll come out better than you started.  I just really *dislike* the idea of discouraging people who truly *want* to help the Ummah, in whatever means they have available.  Because the truth is, we don't *know* which of our solutions will work, and which won't.  Yes, yes, I know--Of course establishing a Khilafa would be the best solution, but in the meantime, we can do other things to further our cause. Wassalam, Nazia

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
ABD
02/16/01 at 11:25:33
Assalamu Alaikum, In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful nad Gracious, Jannah, I totally agree with you, and I would like to come with you to represent the Muslim women in our community and in the country. Even after four years in high school, I have people asking me why I can't date and how I get married. After the first or second question, marriage or dating is the next that they ask. I think that this is a good idea and please inform me if Oprah accepts your e-mail. Salam,

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/16/01 at 14:44:59
Nazia! If people worked as hard to establish khilafah as they do with "mean time" stuff, maybe khilafah would have been establish a lot earlier. It's been over seventy years now it has been gone! What is the ummah doing? Why is it so easy to for idiots like Sadam Husssin, Musharaf and Asad to remove governments and replace them with their kufr ideologies? If the kufr lovers can remove tyrants, and replace tyrannical regimes with other tyrannical regimes, why can't we remove tyrannical regimes and replace them with the Islamic State. The Islamic State does not mean some kind of angelic land on earth, it is just a normal country, with normal people, which is ruled by Allah's laws, not man made ones. You said we should use Opra, by trial and error, the trials have been done and we have seen the errors. We know that they only make these programs to make Islam look bad, unless we have planes on how we know we can outmanoeuvre them and use their programs on their TV channels against them, then we shouldn't do it, cause we will only be helping them.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
se7en
02/16/01 at 15:35:35
as salaamu alaykum wa rahmatAllahi wa barakatuh, This is an interesting article I just came across.  I think a lot of the concerns discussed here are addressed in the article.   Muslim Participation in North American Politics An Interview with Jamal Badawi from [url=http://www.soundvision.com/politics/badawi.shtml]Soundvision[/url] RadioIslam.com conducted an interview with Dr. Jamal Badawi, a leading North American Islamic scholar, professor and author, on the issue of Muslims and electoral politics. The interview was conducted by Itrath Syed and Samana Siddiqui. SS: Assalamu alaikum wa Rahmatullah Br. Jamal JB: Walaykum as Salam SS: Welcome to RadioIslam.com. We're going to be discussing Muslims and the political process, something which is very relevant, especially in the United States with the presidential elections coming up in the fall, Insha Allah. My first question is should Muslims even participate in the voting and political process in general in North America? JB: For the sake of clarification, I'd like first of all to say that Islam by its very nature is a complete, comprehensive system or way of life. I don't like the term that some people use, 'political Islam'. There is nothing called 'political Islam' there is Islam that includes politics, economics, social structure as part of its teaching. It's a complete way of living in that sense. That's one point. Based on that, I must say that the issue of participation in the political process is contingent on at least three different situations I could think of. One is to participate in a Muslim country which is ruling according to the law of Allah and applying it in full. And by in full I mean not only in the matter of criminal law but in terms of economic justice, in terms of Shura, consultation on the political level. That would be one case. Obviously in that setting participation is a duty on every Muslim. Second situation would be a Muslim country that does not rule according to the Islamic law, to the rule of Allah and in some cases may be even a secular country that is forcing secularism on it's Muslim population. That could be another difficult setting. A third one which I suppose you might be focusing on in the context of Muslims in North America, is to participate in a country that is not Muslim and obviously of course does not apply the law of Allah, is it possible or not? My answer to that basically, is that, while the Muslim population in North America is at least familiar that there are two views. There is no secret to that. There are some people who oppose it and some even say it is unlawful, and there are those who say under some qualification it is permissible. But if I would put it very briefly, instead of just saying 'this opinion says that, this opinion says that', or dismiss one or the other, I'm always trying to look for the common ground that all Muslims should agree upon. That much I think, is summarized in the following two points. One: if a Muslim believes that there is any human being who has the right to make laws other than Allah then obviously this is total divergence from the path of Islam. Or any person who believes that secularism is superior to the law of Allah, he's violating the basic Quranic tenets (WA man ahsan min Allahi hukmun li qawmi yuminu) 'who is better in giving us the rule in judgment than Allah, Our Creator'. That's one issue that all Muslims should agree to. The second point that if a person participates in an activity or process which is completely opposed to the foundations of Islam in its basic beliefs, then of course that would be also totally out. I would just like to add one more observation on that second point. The danger we find is to adopt the way of thinking of the Kharijites, the Khawarij, who, whenever they had a small difference in nonessential aspects of Islam, like they call it Furu'u branches, they blew it out of proportion to make it a matter of Iman (faith) and Kufr (disbelief) and those who did not agree with them and their particular interpretation on this minor issue, they put it in the context of even diverging altogether from Islam. Other than these two points, the discussion as to whether it is permissible or not, is an area where there is room for different interpretations. It falls within what the Muslim jurists call as Siyassah Sharaiyya which means just to look after the affairs and benefits of the Muslims which are subject to interpretation within the basic boundaries and rules of Islamic law. SS: So based on what you're saying then, how does a Muslim find out what is Halal and Haram in terms of participating in the political process? When we're talking about methodology, how do we come to an understanding from a purely Islamic perspective based on the Quran and Sunnah. JB: I think that's a very good question, I appreciate it because a lot of times people keep arguing about small details and magnify the differences without even being clear as to what methodology they are using to come up with this understanding. If you're asking about methodology, I'd say at least four points. First of all, that all Muslims are supposed to agree on the primary authoritative sources of Islam and it is known there are two primary revelatory sources: the Quran, the Word of Allah, as well as the sound or authentic Hadiths of the Prophet salallahu alayhi WA Sallam (peace and blessings be upon him). This should be the foundation for all. That's one. A second point is that even in the Quran and in authentic Hadiths, the Ulema or the scholars also make a distinction between things that are definitive or 'Qati' so clear, like for example, Muslims are supposed to pray or pay Zakah. There is no dispute, there is no room for a differing interpretation on one hand. And the things that are probabilistic, they're called 'al Thanni'. In other words, the texts that are clear, yes, are authentic, but may be subject to more than one interpretation. That is second. And in fact, in Islamic law, there is a whole area of this probabilistic type of interpretation in nonessential or basic things. A third issue on methodology: that even when we differ or debate on the interpretation of the probabilistic text, there are certain requirements also. At least I could think of four. One: that all parties should have the sincere intention to seek the truth. In other words not just quote text, that a person would be fully convinced of one idea and going backwards to the text of the Quran and Sunnah just to try to justify their position or to support one party or one group of people. A second requirement: there are also certain essential rules of exegesis or interpretation, understanding of the language and its uses, the occasion of revelation of some verses or Ayat in the Quran or possibly some Ahadith to keep in mind that after all, we cannot isolate one text in the Quran and Hadith and build a theory on that because Quran explains itself and is explained by Sunnah, so you need a more comprehensive view of all the text that relate to one particular subject. A third requirement in interpretation that there should be respect also of specialization. We do respect specialization in chemistry, physics, and everything else. Why can't we also respect specialization in the matter of Shariah, rules of Shariah, or interpretation that we refer to people who are more knowledgeable on that. I would like to say in the very beginning that I'm not giving any Fatwa (Islamic legal ruling) or verdict but I am simply referring to the works which are done by very competent Islamic scholars on this subject. For example, there was a publication by Al Majlis Al Shari'I al Ilmi, that's the, you might say, supreme Shariah council composed of specialized scholars in Lebanon. Dr. (Yusuf) Qaradawi, Dr. Manah el Qattan, Maulana Mawdudi, Kamel Bahnasaoui, Dr. Salah El Salb, there have several specialized scholars who examined that particular issue. As you will see later, that they all agreed with participation under certain circumstances so that's the third condition. In other words, I'm just trying to avoid a situation where somebody who read a couple of books on Islam and he starts giving verdicts and accusing specialized and more learned scholars of not knowing what they are talking about. Respect of specialization. The fourth aspect which I think is very important that all Muslims who are debating that issue, whatever opinion they adopt is fine, but the etiquette of differences should be there. And one of those etiquettes has been symbolized by Imam Shafi'i who very humbly said, 'my opinion is right, that could be proven wrong. And the other opinion is wrong, that may be proven to be right.' By that I mean, okay, if a person is more convinced of one argument or the other in matters where there is interpretations, that's fine. But one should not belittle the other opinion or show any disrespect to other people who came up with a different opinion or follow a different opinion. And worst of all of course is to consider them deviant from Islam, worse even, that they are even outside of the boundaries of Islam altogether. My final first point on this issue of methodology is a repeat of one thing that I also mentioned in the answer to the first question. That if indeed the participation in the political process in a non-Muslim setting means that one believes that there is any system superior to the system or teaching of Allah, then of course this is totally out. So my conclusion is that since there is no definitive, direct, underline direct, text in the Quran and Sunnah that does not specifically answer the question of the setting here in North America, there are texts that could be interpreted to relate to that, then the issue is not really an issue of the foundation of faith, it is an issue, like I indicated earlier, of as Siyassa Shariah, it's a matter of running and conducting the affairs of the Muslim Ummah depending on the particular circumstances. SS: So would you say there are some rules or some boundaries perhaps in Islamic jurisprudence which could help us find an answer to whether or not Muslims should participate in the political process in our context of a non-Muslim society? Particularly, I mean those Muslims who object to participating, and scholars who object often argue that number one, not only is it a non-Islamic state but this non-Islamic state often makes policies and perpetrates policies against Muslims in other parts of the world. I think the sanctions on Iraq, for instance, in the case of the United States, is a very good example. How can we reconcile, for example participating in the political process of a state which is enforcing a deadly embargo on fellow Muslims? JB: Without going into detail listing this issue. These issues are covered, of course, in texts that deal with the so-called Usul al-Fiqh or the roots of Islamic law. But just to get a sample of the broadness of Shariah that people sometimes apply ideas in a very narrow perspective that are much broader framework within which interpretations really should be made. Example of this: there is no denial on the basis of the Quran and Sunnah that one has to weigh the harms or benefits just like when the Quran speaks about drinking or intoxication. Wa ith ma huma akbaru min naf ayma. There is benefit, there is harm, but the harm is greater than the benefit. So the idea of weighing harms and benefits of any particular decision is a very legitimate rule of Shariah. To give a little bit more detail on that: what happened when one thing has to take place, in other words, you're given two choices. You have no third choice. One of them would bring more harm. The other would be harmful but the harm would be less. Obviously, the sensible rules of Shariah here is to accept lesser harm to end a greater harm. What happens if you have two choices, both of them are good, one of them would bring greater good than the other. Again you find that the rules of Shariah are very sensible. Obviously, you take the one that gives greater benefit. But then, you run into a situation where a decision might have something positive but something negative. How do you decide? And there are also detailed rules of how to approach that. For example, if the benefit that's to be achieved is very minor as compared to the harm, get my point, then you don't necessarily take, adopt that particular benefit. You can sacrifice that benefit. You might purge a minimum harm in return for achieving greater benefit. It's just like when you say 'okay if the government expropriates a house or something in order to expand a highway, there is harm, some harm that's being done but there is a huge benefit also that will be achieved.' So things are really controlled by very sensible frame of comparison. That's one. Even a rule that should have been mentioned even before that, that the rules of Shariah, Islamic law, ultimately, are intended to achieve the benefit of people so long as there is no sin or deviation from the foundations of faith. Muslim jurists, based again on the Quran and Sunnah, the Quran and Hadith, the teaching of the Prophet alayhis Salam (upon him be peace), they came up with the conclusion that there is hardly anything that is required by Islam or forbidden except that it falls within five broad objectives of Islam or Shariah. One is to safeguard faith. Second to safeguard life, third to safeguard mind, fourth to safeguard honor, and fifthly, to safeguard wealth or property. So the bringing of benefit to people, in other words, to be religious doesn't mean that you live in a miserable state of affairs. Shariah also looks after even the mundane as well as the spiritual aspects of the life of individuals so this jal bull man fa'a as it is called, to bring benefit and to remove harm are actually guidelines in making any interpretation. A third one which is very important I believe, like Dr. Qaradawi keeps emphasizing this, that we have also to understand the Fiqh or understanding of comparisons between priorities. In other words, at a certain point in time, a certain thing might take greater priority than the other. It is not enough to know the rule of Shariah. More important among the specialists is the skill as to how to apply those broad rules on a given situation. This is known in the Usul, the roots of Islamic law as isqatil hooqq isSharii' alal waqil amali. How do you apply a verdict or rule of Shariah in a particular situation in the context of a given situation. I hope I did not sound to be too abstract in this respect but just to give you one simple example on that issue. I think that might exemplify some of those rules and bring it home. One of the great scholars of Islam, actually many give him the title of Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyya rahim Allah (may Allah have mercy on him), while some people might consider him to be conservative on some issues, in fact he has been so open-minded to the point that he gave a verdict when he was asked. He said suppose the enemies of Islam invade Muslim lands and rule according to their own law. In other words, they frustrate the application of Shariah, and they're ruling according to their own secular non-Islamic or maybe anti-Islamic type of laws. And then they go to a Muslim to serve as a judge. Should he accept the position or not? I would not tell you how Ibn Taymiyya answered that question, but I can tell you what some people today might say. What do you think they would say? They would say how come? If he accepts, he would be a Kaffir. He would be outside of Islam. Why? Because he accepts to be the implementor, as a judge, of a law other than the law of Allah, knowingly. He should refuse. But do you know what Ibn Taymiyya said? He said that he should accept. Do you know the reason he gave? He said, all right, under the circumstances, the presence of a Muslim judge who fears Allah, even though he cannot control, of course, the law, that's beyond his ability, but his presence in his position, is more likely in comparative terms, to bring greater justice because you know any judge can use his own judicial discretion. There is some area of flexibility. He can use his judicial discretion to achieve the greatest amount of justice as compared to a non-Muslim or a person who does not believe in Shariah or does not fear Allah, he could be an oppressive judge following the system fully and wholeheartedly, who would even bring greater harm to people. In fact, some scholars even refer to an interesting situation at the time of Prophet Joseph alayhis Salam (peace be upon him). You know Prophet Joseph was in Egypt. He was not a lawmaker yet he was the one even who offered to be in charge of the distribution of food supplies before the famine started. Some scholars comment and say there is no question that Joseph was occupying this high ministerial position in the state position of power under a system that was definitely contrary to the teaching of Allah. There's no question. He was ruling or taking authority and control in a system where he could not stop, for example, the Pharaoh and other chieftains from getting more than their fair share. Yet, still, his fear of Allah, his wisdom and the position of power that he occupied enabled him to serve masses of people who otherwise could have starved from not doing that. That's basically the reasoning given by Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyya on this issue. Just giving an example on the surface, superficially, it sounds like it's totally out and it's a matter of principle, you should never touch it, you should never get close to it but that's not how the learned scholars look at it. They have to look at it in a more comprehensive and more discerning manner. SS: I understand that you said you did not want to give a Fatwa (Islamic legal verdict) of any sort but can you perhaps share your understanding, very briefly, going back to the original question, more specifically: a. should Muslims vote b. should Muslims run for political office and c. should they support candidates, Muslim or otherwise in the current political system in North American, in the US and Canada? JB: On the first question I don't need to give verdict because many scholars, like the names I mentioned earlier, are of the opinion that if a person is doing that within the boundaries and the precautions that you can speak about then there is no harm if indeed it falls within these basic rules of Shariah. That the voting is likely to bring greater benefit or remove greater harm. I'll just give you one specific example. Suppose you have two candidates for president, for example. Both of them might be not even sympathetic to just Muslim causes, suppose. In most cases that is actually the situation. However, in terms of relative harm and benefit which is a rule of Shariah it may be the collective wisdom, for example, of Muslim voters that one of them would do even greater harm to Muslim causes than the other. Do you see what I mean? Well in that case, obviously, the lesser of the two harms, i.e. electing or voting for someone who will do less harm to Muslims obviously would be much better than sitting on the sidelines and just criticizing both and doing nothing about it. Having no clout or no use of the Muslim voting power to minimize the harm that is being done to Muslims whether in North America or overseas. By the way, it's not all a matter of overseas. Suppose two presidential candidates who are hostile, even, to Muslim candidates but one of them may be more inclined on the basis of the principles of democracy and American constitution to repeal the Secret Evidence Act which has terrorized many innocent people, for example, I'm just giving a practical example of the things that are current even in the news. Is it better to try to remove some of that harm than just sitting there and being totally apathetic to what is going on? So yes, in terms of our best judgment, if that is beneficial, yes we can vote, no problem. Your second question running for office, that's a little bit critical because if you run for an office, for example, you might be part of legislation which is not necessarily Islamic. But that issue again has been addressed by learned scholars. Even though they address the issue in some Muslim countries, it is applicable as well here because as I mentioned earlier if you remember in the first question, I said the difference between participation in a country that applies Islam versus a Muslim country which is not applying Islam or not applying it fully, so that's somewhat similar to the situation we have and there are many Muslim countries which fall in that category. And in fact the verdict that the scholars gave that, yes, it is possible for Muslims to run for political offices even in legislative assemblies like in Egypt, for example, when some of the Islamic leaders were nominated and elected like the late Shaykh Salah Abu Ismail, Raheem Allah and others. And they were elected in the Egyptian equivalent to parliament. Even though they were a minority. Even though we know of course what happened in this election that may not necessarily be representative of the populace, even though they knew that they will be in no position to change the situation. But suffice as they understood to communicate the message of Islam, to present their argument, to remove any excuse for anyone who opposes the implementation of the law of Allah even though they did not necessarily succeed or may not necessarily succeed in doing this. So that issue again is a matter of judgment. It's not Iman or belief or non-belief type of issue. It's an issue again of best judgment as to whether running is just for your own sake, for your own ego, or is it something that might serve some purpose even though you may not reach the ideal, that you're looking for. And then your third question was on what, on support? Should Muslims support candidates? Again if the support of that candidate would remove or lessen harms to Muslims or bring benefit, why not? A practical down to earth example: you know the problem that many Muslim communities face when they apply for zoning or rezoning so that they can build an Islamic center or mosque? Now, we know that a great deal of decision-making power is in the hand of the aldermen, the people in the city council, okay. Now, for example, many of those candidates have been hostile to Muslims and there are other candidates who are reasonable, decent, they may not be Muslims even, but they are reasonable, fair and decent people who support the right of people to build their places of worship as a principle. Voting for them and supporting them in elections is not necessarily an agreement with everything that the law, by way of laws and regulations. But at least it would be for that particular, limited purpose. So in any of these three categories, I cannot claim to say that there is any agreement among all scholars that there is a definite no or a definite yes. But it is a matter of judgment so we can say yes, it is open for debate. SS: So in the case of those who, for example, those scholars who are of the opinion that it is permissible to at least participate in a political system which is not 100 percent Islamic, what kind of risks should Muslims be watching out for? What are some things they should be considering, areas of caution, for instance, that need to be examined before Muslims decide to participate in politics, whether it's by voting or running for office or any other kind of political involvement? JB: Actually more than one scholar who even gave their opinion that it is possible to participate, they did also address those precautions. So that's different from people who just say 'all right, since it's permissible, there is no qualifiers.' Actually they were quite cautious and one of those risks that you're asking about is to get so involved in the political process to the point that it affects your work and your activity as a Muslim. The Muslim's main concern is to establish Deen (Islamic way of life) on earth so there is a broader perspective, one should never forget that bigger picture. By that, I mean if someone spends all of his time or her time for the support of political candidates and getting into party machinery to the point that there is hardly any time for any other Islamic work. And secondly, in some situations, the risk is that there could be some, not debate or honest difference of opinion, but split within the Muslim community on the local or other levels just on the issue of (whether) to participate or not to participate and I do believe that the Islamic manners of debate and differing in opinion and clarification and referring to the scholars could lessen this kind of split or argument that could arise, so instead of Muslims being united and facing the challenges, they turn against each other, whether we participate or not. That's one risk. A third risk is that to participate, obviously, may not necessarily be the ideal situation but that could be tolerated on the basis of the rules we discussed before. But there is fear also that you get into a process of gradual concession after concession after concession and compromise. Well, to compromise on something in terms of benefit or something which is not very essential might be understandable but the fear here is to keep pushing, making compromises on something that really Muslims should draw a line (on). So there has to be a bottom line. And the Quran actually warns us, 'waddu laou tudhinu kama yubhiyuna' as we find in Surah al Qalam for example, that some of the unbelievers were wishing that the Prophet would be relaxed a little on the matter of belief so they find also excuse for that. So this is something that we have to keep in mind, that the line should be drawn as to what would be the bottom line beyond which a Muslim can never give any more compromise. In conclusion, really, if I want to sum it up, again many scholars have spoken to this to emphasize again, number one, Muslims who are involved in the political process should never forget that they are people of Dawa (invitation to Islam), the people of invitation of all of mankind to the message of Allah subhana wa ta'ala. And any argument, any position they take, whether it's election or voting or support must be weighed according to the scale or the criteria of Shariah and on the basis of not just partisan kind of argument but on the basis of real competent scholars and people who can really give an opinion, even though they might differ themselves, but at least it should be based on profound knowledge . Secondly, that for other Muslim groups or parties, for all parties actually, not one or other, for all of them, they should be very careful not to judge their brothers and sisters with just a primitive or preliminary, superficial, hasty judgment and make accusations against them that is not necessarily to be justified. They could be good intentioned. There could be a foundation, whether you agree with it or not, that attitude really should be avoided. And finally, we cannot also blame those who are spending more effort because of their specialization or their competence and understanding how the system operates. We cannot blame them that if they keep at least their minimum obligations as Duaah (callers to Islam) that they are not doing this or not doing that because of course, these are some areas where duties have to be distributed. So there could be complementary roles played by Muslims with a minimum which all of them have to keep in mind. SS: Is there anything you would like to add Br. Jamal? JB: I think at least in terms of basics we seem to have covered that in fact, Insha Allah, I'm scheduled to speak on that issue in some more detail in the New England conference that's coming up in early October where I go into more detail of the specific evidences or arguments from the Quran and Sunnah given by both views you might say on participation which would be of interest of course, we didn't have time in a short program like that to get into that but other than that I think that seems to be the basic outline. SS: Jazak Allahu Khayran. JB: Wayakum SS: Assalamu alaykum wa Rahmatullah. JB: Walaykum as Salam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
salamrae
02/18/01 at 02:58:09
Assalamu Alaikum I think this is a good idea. However one concern is that they do the show only about the muslim women and not make it some sort of debate. And I would like to point out that one statement she gave on this particullar show was that (and it not exact)"women are forced to viel and thus they loose thier identity" HELLO.  Look my sister in law who lives in Saudi wears a veil and believe me she has not lost her identity......Oprah may not specify Muslim women but she is "politcally correct"by doing this and it is not because she wanted to but perhaps because she could get more flack for useing that term. In any case I was very disapointed in this show. First of all she kept talking about this Princess as if she had not freedom. Hello again, she was in the mall when she met him and she already had contact with other friends of his. She was not covered, etc.   I say we all write to her and try to get her to do this show. Not because we have to prove something but because we have had enough of this misconception and we need to have our say . After all we are in America, you know we are " free". Insha'Allah your efforts will pay off. Salam Rae

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/18/01 at 12:54:31
asalm walakum.. This is a reply to the quot from the scholer. I am not a scholer, and i dont claim to be. I have studied in the pressents of government scholers and people whose words have resulted in them being imprisioned and tortured. i have noticed a diffrence when the content i am being tought is something the government has a view on. So i will never even bother to read a article that is writion by a scholer who has not been tortured or at least imprisioned, if his views are the same as his government on that issue and other scholers who have been arrested disagree with him on that issue.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Arsalan
02/18/01 at 13:33:01
[slm] Se7en, great article!  I wish we had gotten our hands upon it earlier, when were discussing the topic of "to vote or not to vote." [quote]So i will never even bother to read a article that is writion by a scholer who has not been tortured or at least imprisioned, if his views are the same as his government on that issue [/quote]Br. Jehad, I think this issue is irrelevant here, because Jamal Badawi does not live in a Muslim country.  He lives in Canada.  And I'm not sure which views of his you are referring to that are "the same as his government"?   I don't like people bashing scholars of Islam (especially those who have done tremendous amounts of work in da'wah) left and right without giving any specifics.  Previously another brother bashed Jamal Badawi and never gave a proof.  Another brother bashed Sh. bin Baz and never backed up what he said. Remember what Rasulullah (pbuh) said about a Mujtahid.  That if his ijtihaad is right, he gets two rewards.  But if it is wrong, he still gets one!  I suggest you read the above article.  And then decide for yourself whether his views are any different from those that were jailed and martyred in the path of Islam (the likes of Syed Qutb, Hasan al-Banna and Syed Abul A'laa Maududi).  You will be surprised!   [slm]'w Wassalamu alaikum.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/20/01 at 15:52:29
Asalm walakum,,, I was not attacking Jamal Badwi, I don't know much about him, the ruling he gave was not from himself, he was quoting from a official institution, in a Muslim country in the middle east. You cant get more government controlled then that. You mentioned you don't like people digging at ulimah. Cause when a alim makes a mistake he gets one reword. This is true, but only if ijtehad is done. I agree with you if the people you are talking about are people like imams Abu Hanifa, Shafi, Malik, Hanbal, three of whom were killed due to speaking truth about their rulers and the bad actions they performed, and Shaifi who advised the khalif of his time used to do it in such away the khalif used to cry in public. It is a fact that the rulers of their time used to rule by Islam, the ulimah criticised them to due to zullum and mistakes that the rulers made. The rulers of today are refusing to rule by Islam, and place them selves as lords above Allah by enforcing laws that emanate from their whims and desires above Allah's laws. The rulers of today show such arrogance as to pick and chose which ones of Allah's laws are worth implementing and where they regard them selves as having the ability to produce a law to inplace of Allah's. It is the job of the ulimah to led the ummah in replacing such dogs. Knowledge of the deen does not mean the person is right, just like knowledge of war does not mean the person is a mujahed. Just as the job of the ulimah is to led us in removing the kufr governments, The job of the army is to protect the Muslim land and lives and doing the physical action that will remove the Non-Islamic governments and protect the Khillafah that will replace them. Not only are too many soldiers and ulimah not doing what they are obligated to do. But allot of soldiers are actually defending the ruler, protecting him, and eliminating his opponents and keeping him in power. Not only are too many ulimah remaining silent about the non-Islamic activities of the rulers and the obligation to remove them, but allot are actively defending them, producing fatwas legalising what Allah made harram and the ruler made Hallal, and forbidding what Allah made Hallal and the ruler made illegal. And at the same time they produce fatwas claiming it is obligatory to obey their rulers and forbidden to try and remove them. The bani israil were lost in the desert for twenty years cause when Allah made Jihad obligatory on then, they said to mosa, "you and your lord go and fight". It is obligatory on us to work to remove these rulers, are we going to imertate the people before, even if it takes us down a lizards hole, or are we going to do what we have to do. No action is a action of defending the ruler, as he will not be removed unless people try and do it. When Yazeed claimed the khilafah without bayah, Hussain rd knew the obligation to remove him, the people of kuffah withheld their support due to fear of Yazzed. Hussain rd, gained martadum and was unable to remove the illegitimate ruler. The people said the hearts of the people of kuffah are with Hussain rd, but their swords are with Yazeed. The hearts of any true Muslim is with the people working to remove the kufr rulers, but unfortunately, for over seventy years too  many of their swords have been on the side of kufr.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/22/01 at 13:25:30
Asalm walakum wa rahmautlah wabarakatihi, My Allah bless your progeny. To my honourable lovely sister Nazia, Your question is in no way rhetorical. It is one of the best questions I have ever heard. It is very important at this time when we are at the twilight years of kufr law, to know what we must do when Allah grants us khilafah. From observation of central Asia and the Arab world it looks like it will be here very soon as the prisons in these lands are now so full of dawa carriers that the government is freeing criminals to make more room. Your qustion consists of more then one qustion, so I am going to devide up my answer to make it as clear as possible. One of the general rules of Islam is "What ever leads to a harram is a harram". This means if doing any action leads us to do another action that is harram, the first action even if normally hallal, will be harram for us. We know from the time when Mohammed pbh, did hijar, that there were some people who didn't leave for Madina, Mohammed pbh, said about such people "they are oppressing them selves", oppression in Islam is harram. Even when there is no Khilafah, if practising our deen becomes too difficult in a land, we must go to some where, where we can practice our deen. The Ullima only give very specific conditions for going in to the land of the Kaffar. The general answer to your question is YES; we will have to move to the khilafah, unless the khalif gives us permission to stay in Dar ul kufr. Today the Muslim world is divided up in to over 50 tiny states. Multiple cues are very difficult to organise, so when the khilafah is established it will only consist of a few countries, in a region of the Islamic world, until the khilafah succeeds in taking control of the nearby lands and then all the Islamic lands. It will be required of the populations of the Muslim countries that are outside the khilafah to try and remove their governments from within to annex their lands in to the khilafah. Today the world population of Muslims is about 2 billion; it is impossible to think that the khilafah will order them all to move in to the khilafah at day one. Jihad is farrad ayn on Muslims living in occupied land, these populations will be required to fight the occupiers, just as the Khilafah will be fighting the occupiers. If they can't, or won't fight, they must leave. After the khilafah is well established, there will still be Muslims in the non-Muslim world, people who are sent there to do a specific for purposes. It is lawful for Muslims to go in to Non-Muslim lands for the purpose of trade. This is how Indo-China (Malaysia etc) became Muslim filled lands. Islamic law had allot to do with the conversions, as what impressed the Malays about Islam was our trading laws. Due to the khilafah, Muslim traders had to trade by Islamic law, good people due to their piety, bad people due to fear of the punishment system in the Islamic State. Today very few Muslim traders know about the 60 different harram contracts in Islam. Most Muslims only know about riba, that is just one of the harram contracts. Today in the west very few Muslims even know how to do business in an Islamic way let alone do it. And now to answer the most Important part of your question. How will dawa happen when Muslims all live in the Islamic State? Today too many Muslims are brainwashed by the western system, allot of Muslims don't like to admit this but: The Sunnah method of dawa is JIHAD. The truth about Jihad that the Muslims for too long have been trying to hide is that it is our method of dawa. Not just of this ummah, most of the lives of Daud AS and Sulayman AS were spent in Jihad, to liberate Allah's creation from the oppression of disbelief. Musa AS told his nation to fight Jihad to bring Islam to the land, but his People said to him "you and your lord go and fight, we are staying here" for this reason his people were lost, wondering in the desert for twenty years. There are two kinds of Jihad, offensive (the main form) and defensive (self-defence). Offensive Jihad, is the Sunnah method of giving dawa, it consists of the khalif, or his representative: Inviting the leader of the kaffar to become Muslim on behalf of his people, if he refuses: He is asked to pay jizia (a tax in exchange for protection, as fighting in the army of the Islamic state is not compulsory for non-Muslims). His nation becoming part of the Islamic state. Ruled by Islamic law. And the Muslims protecting the non-Muslims and their right to remain in their dirty disbelief, in the same way we protect Muslims. If he refuses this: Jihad is declared and his country invaded. Offensive Jihad has allots more rules then defensive, and most of the classical works on Jihad deal with offensive. Islam was carried throw most of the world with offensive Jihad. Muslim filled countries, in the Middle East, Africa and Asia had no Muslims before the Muslim armies moved in. When Egypt was invaded, the only Muslims there were Amar bin as RA and 600 mujahideen, within a few years, seeing the beauty of Islam had resulted in most of the population converting. With Jihad and the Islamic laws that it brings with it, all the obstacle that prevents people from becoming Muslim are removed. So people become Muslim in droves. Muslim Populations had appeared in Europe with out Islamic State, these population were some times tolerated for a couple of generations, until a king came who decided to exterminate them. Being Muslim only became legal here in England in the 1800's. What happened in Indo-China is not the rule, it is a exception, and even then the Kings became Muslim early on, and ruled their people by Islam, Invited their populations and other kings to become Muslim, and carried Islam to other countries in the regain with Jihad. Today in the west there are many obstacles to People becoming Muslim, I know of so many cases of women becoming Muslim and the judge granting custody of their children to the father saying "children can't be exposed to a unorthodox religion like Islam". I know of a case in America where a lady had custody of her kids after divorce. Then she converted to Islam, and her ex sued for custody. The judge gave her an ultimatum, to keep her kids and leave Islam, or loss her kids and keep Islam. Her ex was granted full custody of her kids. I know of another case in America were a convert to Islam lost his daughter to his childminder. And there are many cases where children have been taken by the state and placed with non-Muslims. Mostly due to stereotypes, that is created in their media, for the purpose to make people hate Islam. It is a fact that Islam is clearly true. Any one who knows about Islam believes in it. All of the kaffar I have met who know about Islam told me they believe in it. The society in the west is doing all it can to prevent people from knowing true Islam. They fill their books, Papers, school courses and Media with a distorted image. It is not ignorance cause they have not done so for any other religion. Even more so, with other religions they do all they can to hide or distort what is repugnant. They make it such a stigma to be Muslim, that many people refuse to convert even though they believe whole-heartedly that Islam is true. It is clear that the only effective method of dawa is by the state. When our holly Prophet SW, was in Mecca, only a few individuals embraced Islam, After Hijrah whole tribes and kingdoms did. Our Prophet Pbh had spent many years calling People in Mecca to Islam with very little success, but as soon as he returned to Mecca with his army, the people embraced Islam strait away. The kaffar didn't torture the Muslims, due to the fact they followed a different religion, it was done to make others too scared to convert. Once this fear was removed, there were no more obstacles, and people were free to join the path to Jannah. This applies to today, success only comes with the Sunnah, and People are trying to follow the Sunnah of the Christian Missionaries while rejecting the Sunnah of the PROPHET AS. Today every thing in society from, semi-naked women on advertising posters to schools are pulling people away from Islam, with jihad and the Islamic laws that it will bring all the tools available to the state will have the primary duty to call people to Allah's deen.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
bhaloo
02/22/01 at 14:16:18
slm I think this information is relevant to the discussion Nazia brought up. Residing in Land of Unbelievers Three Fatawa by Sh. Muhammad Taqi al-Uthmani & Sh. Muhammad ibn Salih al-`Uthaimeen Translated by Kamil Mufti -------------------------------------------------- The following are three fatawa from two contemporary scholars on the issue of residing in the land of the unbelievers. The first one is taken from a response written by Muhammad Taqi al-Uthmani for the Majlis of Majma’ al-Fiqh al-Islami, held in Amman, Jordan from 8-13 Safr, 1407 A.H. corresponding to 11-16 October, 1986 in response to one of the 28 questions sent by the Islamic Center of Washington to the Majma’ on issues pertaining to Muslims residing in North America and Eupore. It was published in "Buhuth fi-Qadayaa Fiqhiyya Mu’asara." (p. 328-331) The other two were two questions put to Sh. Muhammad Ibn Salih al-‘Uthaimeen of Saudi Arabia and his response. It was taken from "al-Majmu’ al-Thameen min Fatawa fadilatis-sheikh Muhammad Ibn Salih al-‘Uthaimen." Vol 1, p. 54-61 (Q1) Is it allowed to take the nationaility of America or some European country? Some people who have already taken their nationality or are in the process argue that they are persecuted in their Muslim homelands, imprisoned unfairly, their wealth is seized, and all this forces them to adopt the nationality of non-Muslim countires. Some other Muslims say that when our own Muslim countries do not implement the Islamic punishments (hudud) or Islamic Sharia, then what difference is there between an Muslim and a non-Muslim country? Both are equal in not implementing Islamic laws. On the contrary, when we take the nationality of a non-Muslim country, it preserves our right to live, own wealth, and honor. Moreover, they are safer than Muslim countries. We do not fear imprisonment without a due cause, whereas in a Muslim country we always fear imprisonent. (A) Taking permanent residence in a non-Muslim country, adopting their nationality, and making it one’s country of residence as its citizen is a matter whose ruling (hukm) differs with those who seek citizenship, their motivations, and intentions. For instance: (1) If a Muslim is persecesuted in his homecountry without any crime, imprisoned for no due reason, his wealth seized injustly and he has no way of protecting himself from these injustices except taking residence in a non-Muslim country, then in this case it is permissible for him to take its citizenship without any dislike (kiraha) given he makes sure that he will be able to practise his deen in daily life and is able to guard against the promiscuity and evil widespread over there. The evidence for this is the following: the Companions migrated to Abyssinia after being persecuted by the people of Macca. Abyssinia at the time was led by the unbelievers. And they stayed there, some Companions did not cease to reside after the migration of Allah’s Mesenger to Madina. Abu Musa al-‘Ashari did not return till the expedition of Khaibar, that is in the seventh year after the Hijra. Moreover, it is the right of one’s self (nafs) on a person that he protects it from all forms of injustice (dhulm). If a person can not find protection for himself except in the land of the unbelievers, then there is no obstacle in migrating to it as long as he safeguards his religious obligations and stays away from forbidden abominations. (2) Similarly a person faced by financial hardships who can not find sufficient means of support without which he can not do and he does not find them except in such lands, then it is permissible for him with the conditions mentioned. This is because earning a livelihood is a duty (faridah) after other obligations which the Sharia has not restricted to any one place. Allah says: "He it is, Who has made the earth subservient to you, so walk in the path thereof and eat of His provisions, and to Him will be the Resurrection." 67:15 (3) Similarly, if a person becomes a citizen of a a country to invite its people to Islam or to teach the rulings of the Sharia to the Muslims living in it, then not only is it permissible, but he will be rewarded for it. Many Companions and Tabi’een took residence in the land of the unbelievers for this praiseworthy purpose, and this is counted among their merits. (4) If a person has sufficient financial means at his disposal in his Muslim homeland such that he can spend his life according to the standard of life of other people in his town, but he migrates to the land of the unbelievers to raise his standard of living and to be able to live in luxury, then such is not devoid of dislike (kiraha). He has exposed himself to the evil spread over there without any wordily or religious need sactioning it. Experience testifies that the religious zeal of those who adopt citizenship for the sake of a luxurious life weakens and they melt infront of the glitter of unbelievers. Abu Daud reports on the authority of Samura ibn Jundub that the Prophet said, "Whoever joins a Mushrik and lives with him is like him." (Abu Daud, at-Tirmidhi) Jabir relates the Prophet said, "I am free of every Muslim who lives among the Musrikeen." We asked, "Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?" He replied, "Their fires should not be visible to one another." (Abu Daud) Imam al-Khattabi writes: "Different scholars have interpreted this hadith in different ways. One is that they are not equal in their hukm (‘ruling’; meaning they both have different rulings pertaining to them). Others say this hadith means Allah has differentiated between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr, hence it is not allowed for a Muslim to live in the land of the unbelievers since when they will lit their fire, he will be seen to belong to them. It also an evidence that it is disliked (makruh) for a Muslim to goto Dar al-Harb for trade and to stay there for more than four days." (Mu’alim us-Sunnan by al-Khattabi. Kitab al-Jihad) Abu Daud reports in his Marasil from Makhool from the Prophet, "Do not leave your children among the polythiests." This is why some jurists (fuqaha) have mentioned that Muslims living in Dar al-Kufr and increasing their numbers for the sake of making money takes away a person’s ‘adala (uprightness). (Takmila Radd al-Mukhtar I:101) (5) Taking citizenship of foreign lands to earn respect and honor, or to prefer their citizenship over that of Muslim countries, or to resemble them in daily life is absolutely haram. This does not even require any evidence! (Q2) And he was asked: What is the ruling (hukm) of travelling (safr) to the land of the unbelievers? And what is the ruling concerning going there for tourism? (A) He answered by stating: Travelling (safr) to the land of the unbelievers is iipermissible (la yajooz) unless three conditions are met: (a) That the person has knowledge (‘ilm) to repel doubts (shub-bahaat). (b) That he has deen which will prevent him from falling into lustful desires (shah-a-waat). (c) There is a need to travel. If these conditions are not met he is not allowed to travel to the land of the unbelievers due to the fitna or fear of fitna that exists there and the wasting of wealth that ususally accompanies such visits. As for some (genuine) need like medical treatment or acquiring knowledge that is not found in his land, and he has knowledge (‘ilm) and deen as we have described above, then there is no harm in it. As for travelling for tourism to the land of the unbelievers, then there is no need for that, also, it is possible for him to goto the lands of the Muslims to safeguard the manifest symbols of Islam for his family. Our lands, and all praise is due to Allah, have become tourist attractions where one may possibly go. (Q3) What is the ruling about residing (iqama) in the land of the unbelievers? (A) The Sheikh answered: Residing in the land of the unbelievers is a dangrous matter for the deen of a Muslim as well as his manners and morals. We as well as others have witnessed lot of deviation in those who lived there and came back not being on what they left with. They returned back sinners (fussaq), some even apostated not only from their religion, but from the rest of them as well - refuge is sought with Allah - having become stubbornly resilient, making fun of the deen and its adherents, those who came before and those who came after! Residence in the land of the unbelievers has two necessary conditions to it: (a) The resident is secure about his deen in the sense that he has knowledge (‘ilm), faith (imaan), and a strong resolve such that he can be confident that he will remain firm on his deen, cautious against deviation and misguidance, and he will conceal enmity for the unbelievers and have animosity towards them, far from turning towards and showing affection as turning towards them and loving them goes against Imaan as Allah says: "Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (for ever). Allah will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of Allah. Truly it is the Party of Allah that will achieve felicity." al-Mujadilah 22 " O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust. Those in whose hearts is a disease - thou seest how eagerly they run about amongst them, saying: "We do fear lest a change of fortune bring us disaster." Ah! perhaps Allah will give (thee) victory, or a decision according to His will. Then will they repent of the thoughts which they secretly harboured in their hearts." 5: 51, 52 And it is confirmed in an authentic hadith that the Prophet said, "Whoever loves a people will be one of them, and a man will be with the one he loves." Loving the enemies of Allah is one of the greatest dangers for a Muslim since loving them necessitates conforming with and following them, or at least not stopping them, that is why the Prophet said, "A man will be with whom he loves." (b) That he is able to express his deen in the sense that he is able to establish the outward manifest symbols (Sha’a’ir) of Islam without any hindrance so there is no obstacle in establishing the prayer; the Jumu’ah; the congregation (jama’ah) when there is someone with him to establish the congragation (jama’ah) and Jumu’ah; there is no obstacle in (administering) zakat, fasting, Hajj, and other symbols of Islam. If he is unable to do so, he is not allowed to reside and must migrate (hijra). It is stated in al-Mughni (vol. 8, p. 457) under the duscussion of the categories of people with respect to migration (hijra): "One of those who must migrate is one who is unable to show his deen and is not able to establish the obligatory duties (wajibaat) of his deen due to his residence with the unbelievers. On such it is obligatory to migrate as Allah said: "Lo! as for those whom the angels take (in death) while they wrong themselves, (the angels) will ask: In what were ye engaged? They will say: We were oppressed in the land. (The angels) will say: Was not Allah’s earth spacious that ye could have migrated therein? As for such, their habitation will be hell, an evil journey’s end." 4:97 This is a severe threat which points towards obligation (wajub) because establishing an obligation of the deen is obligatory on one who is able to. Migration (hijra) is from the requirements of the obligation and its perfection and if an obligation can not be fulfilled except something, then that thing becomes obligatory as well." After completing these basic conditions, residence in Dar al-Kufr can be divided into the following types: (1) That he resides to give da’wa to Islam and awaken (people) to it. This is a type of Jihad that is a communal obligation (fard kifaya) on the one capable with the condition that he will materialize the da’wa and there is no obstacle in (delivering) it or (others) responding to it. This is because da’wa to Islam is from the obligations of the deen and the way of the messengers. The Prophet has commanded to deliver the message on his behalf in every age and time as he said, "Relate from me even if a single verse.’ (2) That he resides to study the state of the unbelievers and to know what they are upon of corruption (fasad) of creed (aqeeda), false worship, immorality, and confused behavior so he may warn people of the reality of their affairs. This type of residence is also a type of Jihad since it serves as giving a warning against disbelief and the unbelievers which implies inviting to Islam and its guidance. The corruption of disbelief is proof for the vailidity of Islam as they say, ‘things are known by their opposites.’ But he must materialize his intent without incurring greater harm since if he does not materialize his intent by not spreading what they are upon and cautioning against it, then there is no benefit of his residence. If materializing his intent will result in a greater harm like reciprocating their abuse of Islam, the Messenger, and the scholars of Islam because of his action, then he must hold himself back as Allah has said, "Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did." al-An’am 108 This residence in the land of the unbelievers is like being the eyes of the Muslims so he may know how the Muslims should plan against their deceptions as the Peophet sent Hudaifa ibn Yamman to the polythiests to obtain information about them. (3) That he resides for some need of a Muslim country and establishing (diplomatic) ties like an embassy staff. Their ruling is the same as for the ones for whom they are staying. Cultural attache may, for instance, stay in order to oversee the affairs of the students and to watch them and to encourage them to practise the deen of Islam and its morals and manners. By his reseidence great benefit might be achieved. (4) That he resides for a specific, permissible need, for instance trade or medical treatment. In this case it is allowed for him to reside as long as may be needed. The scholars have stated the permissiblity of entering the lands of the unbelievers based on some reports from the Companions. (5) That he resides for education. This is similar to residing due to some need as mentioned above, but it is more dangerous and harder on the religion of the resident and his morals. This is because a student is conscious of his low level and the high level of his instructors. This leads to repect of and conviction in their beliefs and ideas. Hence, he may blindly follow them save for those whom Allah protects. Moreover, a student depends on his instructor which leads to affection and a desire to please him in the deviation and misguidance he is upon. Also a student might make friends among his peers, love them, turn towards them, and take from them. Due to the extreme danger of this of this type, we will add some more conditions to the ones already mentioned: (a) The student must be at a very mature mental level which would enable him to distinguish between what is beneficial and what is harmful and be able to foresee distant future. Sending young and immature ones is very dangerous for their deen and morals. Moreover, they also pose a threat to their communities after they return and spew forth the poison they were made to drink from these unbelievers as we have seen and is testified by reality. Many of them return back but not as they left - they come back deviated in their morals and manners. They cause great harm to their societies in these matters as can be seen. Sending them is like putting a sheep infront of a raving predator! (b) The student must have knowledge of the Sharia that would enable him to distinguish between truth and falsehood and fight falsehood with truth perchance he is duped by the falsehood they are upon, imagining it to be truth or is deceived,or is unable to defend it, otherwise he will be left confused following falsehood. A reported suppication states, "O Allah, show me the truth as the truth, and enable me to follow it. O Allah, show me show me falsehood as falsehood and enable me to stay away from it and do not let it confuse me, so I may be misguided." (c) The student has deen that will safeguard and protect him against disbelief and sinfulness. One weak in his deen will not be safe if he resides there, except for whom Allah wills otherwise. This is because onslaugths are strong and the defenses are feeble. Causes of disbelief and sinfulness are many and diverse so if he comes across an occasion with feeble defenses, he might fall into it. (d) There is some need of the knowledge for which he is residing over there, for instance, there is some benefit for the Muslims in him acquiring it. Also, the same education is not available in institutions of his own land. If it is useless type of knowledge or if it is available in Islamic lands, he is not allowed to reside in the land of the unbelievers for it since residing with them poses a danger to the deen and the morals and a waste of wealth without benefit. (6) He resides to live and settle. This case presents more danger than the ones before and leads to greater harm because it involves complete mixing with the unbelievers since they demand nationalistic allegiance and doing so increases the numbers of the unbelievers. His raising family with people of disbelief leads to adopting their morals and habits, maybe even blind imitation in belief (aqeeda) and worship. This is why a hadith mentions that the Prophet said, "Whoever joins a Mushrik and lives with him is like him." Even though it has a weak isnad but it sets a perspective since settling leads to resemblance. Qais ibn Abi Hazim reports on the authority of Jarir ibn Abd-Allah that the Prophet said, ""I am free of every Muslim who lives among the Musrikeen." We asked, "Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?" He replied, "Their fires should not be visible to one another." Reported by Abu Daud and at-Tirmidhi. Most of the the reports are mursal from Qais ibn Abi Hazim from the Prophet. At-Tirmidhi said he heard Muhammad - that is al-Bukhari - saying the correct opinion concerning the hadith of Qais is that it is mursal. How can the soul of a believer feel good about settling in the land of the unbelievers where the symbols of unbelief are dominant, the rule belongs to other than Allah and His Messenger, and he witnesses to that with his eyes and hears with his ears and is pleased with it! Rather he ascribes himself to those lands and settles in them with his family and children and feels content with that as if he was in the land of the Muslims! This is notwithstanding the great danger on him, his family and children regarding their deen and morals. This is what we have reached as far as residing in the lands of the unbelievers is concerned. We ask Allah that He makes it conform to what is right and correct.
NS

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
Kathy
02/23/01 at 09:15:21
slm slm The cause of Islam needs to be reinforced at home and with our own familiy, friends and neighbors first. I am pretty sure that my family and neighbors would not even want to hear about Islam, much less embrace it judging it on how alot of the muslim men treat their families, in my neck of the woods.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/23/01 at 12:17:13
asalm walakum kathy,,, the main reason for Muslims having non-Islamic maners is due to picking it up from people around them. Living in non-islamic atmaspher fills Muslims with these behavers, and alot of Muslims see these behavers as vertues, and try to excel in them, excedind the kaffar who they are trying to imertate.   The best way to do dawa, is if that is what you are trying to do. Muslims in the west are mostly not here for dawa, they are here cause they like the life here. so they are not trying to set a example to the nonmuslims, they are trying to immertate them

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
chachi
02/23/01 at 23:32:55
all publicity is good publicity so far as islam is concerned the number of people converting to islam  rocketed during the rushdie demo's       good work jannah

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jannah
02/23/01 at 23:38:22
ok i would just like to re-iterate --- this is a FORWARD i didn't write it, in fact i had nothing to do with it, but found it interesting so posted it here.. but if you would like to pat me on the back virtually i don't mind :)

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
02/28/01 at 11:24:21
Asalm walakum.. to the americans.. Has princess got up to any thing else on tv lately? i have not heard anything about her on british tv or seen or adverts about the movie, probebly cause bahraini  government is very loyal to brition, so the government here doesnt want to do any thing to offend them.

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
humble_muslim
02/28/01 at 13:46:38
AA I have a HUGE amount of respect for the Saudi scholars.  But whenever I read the rulings about not being allowed to live in the land of kuffar, why don't they talk about the haram, unjust and opressive immigration policies in countries like Saudi ?   If I could get into Saudi as easily as I got into America, and have the same rights to settle there as I have here, I would not be in this place for another second! I really think some scholars have to stand up and make it very clear that immigration policies are 100% HARAM, and are in fact a form of zulm (oppression).
NS

Re: Need Muslims to appear on the Oprah show
jehad
03/02/01 at 12:54:52
asalm walakum the fact is a lot of them do talk about these. thats why the prisons in suadi are full of scholers. A lot of people respect scholers in suadi, but the strage thing about the people who respect them is, once the government scholer's takwa rises above his fear of the ragim and the consequences of speaking the truth. he talks about these things and other things about the ragim, and gets arrested and turtured and loses all his titles and salaries. the other suadi scholers call him a deviant, and people who used to respect him, stop respecting him and call him a deviant.
Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author. The rest © Jannah.Org