What 'Love, InshAllah' and other so-called progressive Muslim feminists don't get

Look at the rubbish that Shahla Khan Salter wrote on Huffington Post.

Titled "To Our Muslim Sisters: Don't Let Faith Stop You From Getting Married", the article makes the point that Muslim ladies should feel free to marry non-Muslim guys.

I first saw this article when Love InshAllah linked to it from their Facebook feed. Even before I read it, Ihad an inkling of what the article would say, and why the authors of Love InshAllah would promote it.

To all Muslim feminists: You want to solve issues in Muslim societies? Solve them. Don't create new ones. Especially when the solution is already given and you don't like it because it doesn't fit your Western "feminist" views.
 
This article, like many on the progressive left, relegates religion to "do what feels right". In essence, they elevate an individual and their own feelings/desires over what is revealed by God and understood as such for generations.

Islam, like almost any religion, has laws. If someone doesn't want to follow those laws, that's fine, but calling oneself Muslim and then saying those laws are not really laws is like saying I am vegetarian but it's OK to eat chicken. These laws are not a buffet that you choose what you want. Like any religion, Islam severely restricts marriages to outside the faith. Only in some exceptional circumstances is it tolerated.

This article is saying you are Muslim but don't need to follow the law, it's OK. Marry outside the faith, it's fine. Islam says it's OK (actually it clearly doesn't). 

The article, and the author, tries to fit Islamic law to some Western sensibilities. The author is saying a husband doesn't need to be Muslim, but only has to "love" his Muslim wife and her "Muslimness" (whatever that means). The article adds that a woman has the ultimate freedom to choose her husband, any one she wants (not really: if she's Muslim she has accepted to live under some moral laws defined by God). The author goes on to say that since we face other challenges we should be able to marry whoever we want (not true, those other 'challenges' can be dealt with other ways).

The final advice itself is dangerous: "Follow your heart".

The whole concept goes against Muslim ethos which is "do not give in to your base desires if it goes against God's desire".

The so-called "progressive" Muslim feminists who form the bulk of Love InshAllah's fan club do not understand one clear thing: no matter how many times they post rubbish like this under the guise of "furthering dialogue" or "promoting an interesting point of view", real Muslims will stick to their religion, no matter how tough. 

Islam hasn't come to create problems, but to provide solutions. Muslim Feminists don't like this solution, so their create problems of their own.

Other articles on Muslim Feminism:

Why Muslim Feminists Don't Win

Why (Many) Muslims Have a Problem With (Most) Feminists

Should Kids Be Banned From First Class?

 
As a dad who just flew halfway across the world with two young boys, I can tell you that flying with kids isn't easy. While the older one kept himself busy with movies and games and toys (thank you Emirates!), the younger one couldn't understand why he was cooped in that small place without any seat (that's why we flew when you are less than two, kid, coz it's cheaper!).

I think 8 hours was our longest flight (Toronto to London) and it was the maximum we could really handle. We broke up our flight to India into pit stops. Couple of days in London, some days in Dubai, and then to India, and same on the way back. And I think this kept us sane; we wouldn't have been able to handle a 15 hour direct flight back with a screaming infant. And then a screaming toddler because the screaming infant bit him. Fun!

So when I read on the news about a bunch of passengers miffed about a crying baby in first class (and Delta's awful reaction to that), I could understand. You paid $10,000 to ride first class, and you want to ride in comfort. Screaming baby, especially someone else's screaming baby, does not equal comfort. Though if you paid that much for a Delta seat of all airlines I really have to question your logic, I mean Delta?!!

But you know what, deal with it. You paid for your seat, not someone else's. An aircraft is a shared place and there's all types of people. Just like the uncle who keeps burping in the mosque (and who I really want to take out ban, but can't), you have to tolerate noises from other folks that are discomforting to you.

One flight I spent next to someone who wouldn't take the hint and kept trying to make conversation with me (in case you can't tell, I am an introvert kind of person on a flight, and also not on a flight). Another time this lady behind me did nothing to control her wild toddler who kept kicking my seat. That's what goes on in a public space - you have to deal with inconveniences.

I have noticed this same trend go to other discussions, such as the insane proposal to ban strollers on public transit. Now, granted, some strollers look like SUVs, and some inconsiderate moms really just "park" their stroller at the entrance while blocking the pathway on the bus for others, but most are simply ordinary folks trying to use the public transit just like you and me.

I am often trying to sleep on the subway ride home, but sometimes there's two chatterboxes who sit adjacent to me and talk in a loud voice all the way. I mean, like, you know, it's like ... what the hell .. you spend the entire Islington to Kennedy talking about nothing. But you can't really start implementing "quiet zones" on the TTC subways.

So if a parent wants to pay and take their screaming kid on first class, why not. Deal with it.

AfD - The News That Could Occur Next Year in Germany

In a stunning upset, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been declared the victor in the national elections, carving out a clear majority in the Bundestag.

The victory makes Frauke Petry, the spokesperson of the AfD, next in line for the Chancellery. The unexpected result also questions the very existence of EU, as Ms Petry repeatedly denigrated the institution during the campaign, and promised to take Germany out of EU if it meant, in her words, "subsidizing the lazy people of Greece and Spain with hard working German money". The results have thrown world markets into turmoil, further depressing the Euro.

Europe is in the midst of a stunning upheaval. Following from Brexit, and the shock election of Donald Trump as the President of USA (and the dismantling of NATO, followed by the cancellation of Paris Accord and the TTIP), Hungary, Holland have both voted to leave the troubled organization.

If Germany, a founding member and leader in the EU chooses to depart, it may well be the death blow to the EU. The Chinese yuan has already risen ten fold in thirteen hours since the election result.

It was thought for a long time that Germans would never warm to a political party pledging allegiance to neo Nazi ideals, denigrating migrants, peddling Islamophobia and anti-Semitic propaganda and insulting long standing allies. Indeed polls right the day before the vote gave a huge lead of 29.5 points to now outgoing Chancellor Angela Merkel.

The party has also pledged to take Germany back to its "Christian roots" and sought to strengthen the church and family values in Germany. Its closeness to the Vatican has also raised eyebrows, with the Pope choosing to remain silent on some of the outrageous statements issued during the campaign.

In hindsight, the Holy See must have seen something the polls had all missed. An anger at the current state of government, the bureaucracy in Brussels, the numerous Muslim migrants and the crimes alleged to have been committed by them (all debunked as false news by Politico Germany) and the "I-know-best" attitude of the ruling Christian Democratic Union.

It now remains to be seen how Europe will reshape itself in the years to come following this cataclysmic election.

Why American Muslims Should Leave USA Right Now

My American Muslim friends and family.

Before I start, I want to tell you a little reality. It's something you can ask any Canadian, especially those who were immigrants to the Great White North, and they will verify this.

We often go the United States for little trips. Disneyland, shopping, tourism, work, visiting friends and family, and so on. The Americans are (usually) very nice and we have no complaints.

But ...

On the way back, as soon as our car crosses the 49th parallel back to Canada, we heave a sigh of relief. Just a few meters over the border in Canada, everything is the same as it was in US. The highway is equally good, the scenery hasn't changed much, the weather is the same. But something is different. We are in Canada.

We are home. We belong.

Now I ask you. Do you feel a sense of belonging in America? Is it your home? Is the government of America your government? Does it serve you? Are the people yours? Do they accept you as one of them?

These are not some bland questions. I want you to think about it deeply. What does it say when your country has elected a man who has openly villified your religion, talked about putting you in special registration programs, advocated a shutdown of people of your faith coming in to the country, and refused to apologize for his numerous racist, bigoted, sexist, ultra right wing comments?

In your country the police openly shoot unarmed black civilians without any fear. And this was under a black President.

This is the same country that elected Bush twice. An illegal war killing millions (and some of them Americans) did not stop a majority of the people from voting for him. And this is a country where the Muslim FRIENDLY candidate would talk about Muslims being on the front lines of the war against terrorism, would continue the drone bombings of civilians, would continue the PATRIOT act, amongst others. Not even the other guy. The other guy is far worse. And he is now your President, elected by half of your countrymen.

I don't need to go on. I know you KNOW the situation is bad. I am writing to tell you why you should LEAVE the United States NOW. Before it gets worse, and before your options dwindle, LEAVE NOW. While you still can.

I know this is your homeland, your place of birth. This is where you grew up. Went to school. Got married. Made a life. It's not easy to even think about moving.

There is some merit to the idea to stay, and fight, and make things better. Strive for your country. Try and make the society better. Help your country.

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) stayed in Makkah for 55 years - the vast majority of his life - trying to improve the society, help the people, strive for his place of birth. But at some point, you have to realize that things are not going to get better, ever. In fact, they will get worse.

The Clock Boy - Ahmed - was a genius and he was put in jail. And he was a KID! Sure, he then met the President, and the Faceook CEO, but what good did it do? Other future Clock Boys would still be put in jail. And there are no consequences. And this was under a black Democrat President. Things are not going to get better.

They are going to get worse.

We thought Bush was bad. 9/11 happened, and surveillance and overreach of power and so on. When you guys elected Obama, there was Hope that things would Change.

But has things changed? They only became worse. Obama never undid the Patriot Act. He made sure the US government could assisinate its own citizens. He never shut down Guantanamo Bay. Drone killings became a fact of life.

And now, what? The KKK approved guy is your President, with the House, the Senate and pretty soon the Supreme Court in tow. What more signals do you need to know things in America are not going to get better. Trump will not be able to make America Great Again, the way his supporters want him to. It's not 1950s any more. And then what?

I would urge you to consider Canada. It's right next door, and the culture is very similar. As part of NAFTA (until your new President dismantles it) you can get a job here easily before applying for Permanent Residence.

We are not perfect. We have healthcare, but it has issues (we are working on it to fix it, not dismantle it). We don't have racism the way you do, but we do have the French part of the country, Quebec, that ocassionally tries to ban the niqab or hijab. In fairness, our current Prime Minister also hails from Quebec, so there's a lot of good people there as well.

We have Muslims in the Cabinet, while you will now have a person in Cabinet (Ben Carson) who rose in the polls by saying US Muslims should never serve in Cabinet.

Sometimes our police do kill an unarmed civilian. But then we have an inquiry and an investigation. It's nowhere on the same scale as in USA, which is why Black Lives Matter gets far less traction here.

We had First Nations women being killed and missing for a long time. Our last Prime Minister refused to have an investigation, and prefered "old stock Canadians" (whatever that was). We got rid of him, and now we have an official inquiry into those missing women led by a lady who is a First Nations person herself.

Yes, things are not perfect (I mean there's our weather) but Canada is a far better place to be a Muslim than America, alhamdulillah. Our Walmart sells Halal stuff without any cries of boycott.

And we need you. We need you because the election of your crazy President will embolden the crazies here. You might remember our last Prime Minister. He's not there any more but there's people trying to become the leader of his party. Some of them are crazy right wing, and they will have noted the success of your President. We need you guys here so they don't succeed. We really like it here and don't want to move (ironic, eh?).

After 55 years in Makkah, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) realized things are not getting any better, but were getting worse. So he immigrated. He left his beloved place of birth and moved on. Your parents (or their parents) made the decision to move to this country for economic reasons. So you can't say you cannot move because it's your birth place - they did it and you can too.

Yes, some Muslims remained in Makkah because they couldn't move due to various circumstances. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) always prayed for them, and helped them when he could.

So whatever your decision is, you will always be in my prayers. And may God be with you.

And may God bless your country with true justice.

Ten Thoughts on the Historic US Election

So America has done it. Elected Donald Trump as President.

(Picture courtesy: Rolling Stone)

Some thoughts (a postmortem, if you will).

1. The racists have won. 

There is no way to sugar coat it. The man ran on a racist platform, and was endorsed by the KKK, and won.

2. White people have nothing to fear.

Notice all the talks of losing Democrats about coming together, healing, congratulating the President and wishing him well. They are all white. People of color remember what Trump said about them.

3. Muslims in USA should seriously think about emigration.

Trump cannot target Hispanics or other immigrants as easily as Muslims. Immigration from Muslim countries will be curtailed. So it's really time to think about the long term future.

Also, kind of ironic to see famous sheikhs (you know who they are) who thought Clinton had it in the bag and couldn't resist a dig at her, saying how bad she was and why third parties deserve a look and how America was facing two bad choices. Now they are calling out to Allah for help and guidance. Should have done that before the election.

4. Trump did everything wrong, and still won.

No ground game, no significant ad buys, no support from the main party, no coalition of diversity, and still won. He proved in the US you can run on white supremacy and win a national election.

As Electoral-vote said, 

"Similarly, everything we thought we knew about campaigning was apparently in error. Conventions? Don't matter. Debates? Don't matter. Endorsements? Don't matter. High-profile defections? Don't matter. Missteps? Don't matter? Commercials? Don't matter. Ground game? Doesn't matter. An All-Star team of campaign surrogates, including one former president, one sitting president, and a wildly popular first lady? Doesn't matter. The "blue wall"? Not a thing."

5. All the polls were wrong. 

Like, ALL of them. This will have significant impact future elections. Why should anyone pay any attention to what the polls say?

6. Trump controls the House and the Senate. 

In the next 4 (or maybe 8) years he could appoint as many as 5 Supreme Court justices. America has really changed into a darker society yesterday.

7. Sexism, racist, and generally bigotry was always there, it just needed a champion and it found one.

Americans can't really say it's only a fringe minority who are racist. As a nation, yesterday they proved themselves to have no qualms about electing a racist bigot. 

8. Hillary cheated Bernie out of a nomination win in the Democratic primary.

Hillary lost in 2008 to an unknown called Barack Obama and did not want history to repeat itself. So this time around she made sure she was going to get the nomination by any means necessary. The Democratic primaries should have been a signal. Despite all the advantages of the party machinery, she had trouble beating an unknown old man from Vermont. 

When facing a choice between a fake and a real deal, voters usually choose the real deal. For all his faults, Trump was Trump, warts and all. No one knew what Hillary really stood for. 

9. For all our smugness in Canada, be prepared. 

Our Conservatives must have seen that being crazy, racist and a bigot can lead you to victory. Be prepared for more craziness from our right. And we thought Harper was bad.

10. Final thought:

If you as a white person feel frightened of a Trump presidency, then think of an immigrant, a Muslim, a Mexican, a person of colour, a gay, trans or marginalized person.

Little Kids Wearing Headscarves

There was an article in the Guardian recently which was entitled This trend of young Muslim girls wearing the hijab is disturbing. 

Now I will be the first to admit that I myself find it disturbing when I see six year old girls wearing a full hijab. Six year old girls are not required to wear hijab in Islam. They are not even required to pray. All of these rulings come much later, when they become adults (i.e. puberty). Why objectify young girls by asking them to wear a clothing that is supposed to be modest (and thus hide their sexuality - which they don't have SINCE THEY ARE SIX YEARS OLD)? 

Now I will also admit my discomfort is because most of the people I know (fathers especially) who make their little girls wear hijab usually tend to be those close minded hateful so-called "orthodox" Muslims with limited knowledge and a very harsh understanding of Islam. These are the 'fire-and-brimstone' type people and usually it's their kids I see dressed like this, hence my discomfort. 

But, is it any other person's business? And then if you continue to read the Guardian's article, you will see it slowly veers into nonsense. It makes statements about the hijab which isn't true. And then you come to realize that it's not the hijab that this writer finds scary, but the very fact that Muslims are practicing their religion. To this writer, the only good Muslim is a non-Muslim.

Now, if I were to write in the same veneer as the article, I would also say that this trend of young girls treating themselves as sex objects is highly disturbing. I am of course talking of the beauty pageants that occur in the US, with teenagers and sometimes kids as young as six. It's actually a documented fact that kids are now becoming hyper sexual and sexually aware in the West at a very early age.

The other day a video of a 13 year old girl setting up her boyfriend to see if he would cheat on her was widely shared on facebook. 13 years old?!!! At that age normal kids are thinking about exams and cartoons and movies. Yet in America and the West, it's normal to be engaged in a physical relationship when you are legally not even old enough to have that relationship.

So you tell me, which is more scary?

Perhaps it's those thirteen-year-old kids that should start wearing the hijab.

Why the RIS List of Speakers is Inexcusable

On the very same day that Canada's new government took office with a cabinet that was made up of 50% women, the RIS (the Reviving the Islamic Spirit) Convention released its list of luminary speakers at this year's December convention.

RIS is an annual conference held since 2003, and has become one of the largest Islamic conferences in North America, along with ISNA in the USA. Over 20,000 people attended in 2015, making it the largest Islamic conference in Canada. Yet, year after year, there has been a complaint about the list of speakers at RIS, so one hoped that this year RIS would get it right.

Here is how RIS gets it spectacularly wrong (or doesn't get it at all) .

GENDER EQUALITY

It should not be lost that today was the day Prime Minister Justin Trudeau started his government in Canada and for the first time ever, the cabinet was made up of 50% women. Asked to explain why that was important, he simply - yet so powerfully - replied, "It's 2015."

What about RIS? Let's see how a conference about Islam, which many of these same scholars say gave women equal rights in 620 AD, is doing in 2015.

Out of the 23 speakers listed on the site, only 6 are women. That's merely 26%. Moreover, if the past is any precedent, the women will speak either in the morning, or early evening, while the men will get the prime time evening spots when maximum number of attendees are there. Many of the men are also scheduled to speak multiple times, while most of the women speak only once.

Is it too much to ask that out of 23 speakers, at least 10 be women? I am sure that despite the fact that some women scholars dislike to speak in front of a huge mixed gathering, we can at least find ten in the whole world?

CANADIAN CONTENT

RIS is a Canadian conference, yet where are the Canadian scholars? From the bios provided on the site, I could only find 1 Canadian. If you think women have it bad, that's  0.043%. What about renowned Canadian scholars and imams like Sheikh Yusuf Badat, Imam Dr. Hamid Slimi, Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, Sister Ingrid Mattson - just to name a few? We are in Canada, and as recent elections, governance and public discourse has proven, we are a distinct society from the United States. Why should we have a conference where the overwhelming bulk of the speakers are foreigners?

There are plenty of other reasons for criticism of RIS as well. They are too shy of courting political controversies and hence their talks are always very timid. Since Tarek Ramadan published a popular open letter as to why he doesn't attend these conferences anymore, RIS seems to have doubled down on any political activity or call to action for justice.

So if you want a timid, feel good, nothing substantial but overpoweringly fluffy male dominated foreigner populated Islamic conference, please do attend RIS.

Minority Rights on the TTC Subway

So on the subway today, as I was preparing to doze off until my stop, an elderly white gentleman seated beside me suddenly turned to me and said, "Excuse me, are you Muslim?"

When I replied in the affirmative, he said, "Can I ask you a question if you don't mind? Why is it that whenever Muslims come here, or to a Western country, they are all very nice about minority rights, but in Muslim countries minorities are treated like garbage?"

It was a very loaded question, and though he was a soft spoken man, I could see a couple of other people turn in to listen.

"Great," I thought. "Here I go, being the representative of 1.6 billion people."

"Thank you," I told him, "That you asked me. If you have questions about Muslims, go to a Muslim, or to the mosque. Is there any particular Muslim country you are thinking of?"

As chance would have it, he mentioned Bangladesh (how a secular publisher was hacked to death by fundamentalists) and Pakistan (whose Hindu minority is fleeing to India). I then asked him if he followed any religion. Very proudly, he replied he was a Catholic, and sang praises about the current Pope and his tolerance.

"Tell me one thing." I asked him. I was very grateful for the fact that he was willing to listen and engage. "Have the Catholics always been tolerant of minorities? Is there not a history of massacre and mayhem in Catholic history, particularly during the Crusades? Forget the fact that they massacred a whole city of Muslims and Jews in Jerusalem, these knights were personally blessed by the Pope and they killed Orthodox Christians by the thousands!"

He was quiet for a while, and then replied, "But that's in the past, IF it's true. I am talking about the present."

"Do you know who Rana Bhagwandas is?" I asked him. This is where I was glad I recently read about the very two people I would talk about now.

"No." He replied. "Is he Indian?"

"He is actually the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan." I replied (I didn't know that he had passed away this year, something I found out when composing this post). "A Hindu. A recent Captain of Pakistan cricket was Yousaf Youhana, a Christian then. Do you know who the current chief justice of Bangladesh is?"

When he said he didn't know, I replied it is a Hindu person as well (I didn't know the name then, but it's Surendra Kumar).

Then I told him, "No doubt, it is not as rosy as it is for minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh, as it is for Muslims here in Canada. But those countries have other political problems, and religion is just one factor. Many Muslims also die in the political violence there."

"But what about Saudi Arabia?" He said. "You can't build a church there, or drink beer, and the women are treated like animals."

"Have you been to Dubai? Or Beirut?" I asked him. "Those are right next to Saudi."

"I haven't been there," He conceded.

"I lived in the UAE." I told him. "Lots of expatriates there, many of them Christian and they have their own churches and services. They are not allowed to convert anyone though, In Lebanon, by law the President has to be a Christian and the Prime Minister a Muslim."

"But what about Saudi?" He insisted. "It is the home of Islam. In Rome, we recently built the largest mosque in Europe."

"I would think the home of Christianity is in the Holy Land." I really cannot defend Saudi Arabia, so I switched the venue. "Jerusalem, where Christ preached. His Church of Nativity still stands today, after a 1000+ years of Muslim rule. In fact, till today, the person holding the key of the Church is a Muslim, because the Christians are fighting amongst themselves."

I then decided to go on the offensive. "In this country, Canada, the Harper government has spent thousands of your dollar trying to prevent a woman, a Muslim and a minority, from covering her face. Where was the respect for minority rights then? In Quebec, they tried to ban women from covering their hair get government services. Where was the respect for minorities there? In France, women cannot cover their hair and go to school. Is that respect for minority rights?"

"Well..." He was quiet for a bit. "They are immigrants who should respect the culture of the land they moved to, and not try to impose their way on the majority."

"And that," I told him, "is what a fundamentalist in Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Burma would say."

We talked some more, but my stop had arrived, so I shook his hand and departed. I don't know if I changed his mind (he didn't seem convinced), but the hardest part in all of this exchange was for me to maintain my cool.

It would have been so easy to lash out and say "well f*** you the Western imperial army has destroyed the Middle East and support regimes and blah blah f*** you and look at black people being killed in USA" but I don't think that would have accomplished anything. I also went and did some reading on minority rights and the West. Hopefully I will run into this gentleman again.

Rejecting the Kindness of Strangers

So there I was, sitting on the food court of the mall with my son Yusuf. We were waiting for my wife to finish her shopping. I was sitting, sipping my cup of tea, while the son was busy with a toy that I occasionally had to feign interest in. All of a sudden I see two hands reaching out to give my son a couple of candies.

It was an old lady seated at the next table in the food court. She was having nuts from a bag, and was dressed in a shalwar kameez and had a scarf on, and a smile on her face.

"Your son is so cute, MashAllah." She said, munching on her nuts.

"Why, thank you." I said. Even as I beamed her a smile, my mind was running in a different direction.

Don't unwrap the candy. Don't even think of eating it. I silently prayed, trying to mentally project my orders to my son. Happily, my son was not too hungry - he was just fascinated by the shiny wrapper on the candy, but at that moment the toy had more attraction to him.

"Do you want some?" Before I could say anything else, the lady took a handful of nuts and offered them to us. And when I say offered, I mean she literally dumped them on our table. At this point, I did have to take a firmer stance.

"Er, we don't really eat nuts, and my son is definitely a fussy eater."

I took the nuts and placed them back on her table.

"But thank you anyways."

Later, when we left, I took the candies (they were some toffee that looked Chinese) and threw them into the bin, feeling guilty as I did so. The lady seemed thoroughly a nice old kindly lady, but I wasn't going to feed mystery food to my kid.

It's the society that we live in now that we have to reject the kindness of strangers. I myself would never offer my own food to another person's child, and as a man I would never comment on another baby's cuteness or pet him. Even as we have become more connected via online, in reality we have built these highly invisible walls around ourselves and woe betide anyone who wants to break them. And why not, when there are sickos like these in our society.

For the evil of a few, the goodness of the many must be shunned.

You guys have such a Hindu culture!

"You guys have such a Hindu culture!"

The above was said to me by a Pakistani acquaintance just as we were discussing the 3-0 drubbing that Bangladesh handed out to Pakistan in the recent cricket ODI series. He wanted to know if our player Soumya Sarkar was a Hindu. 

"Honestly, I don't know." I replied. "I was curious about it as well. Sarkar is a last name common to both Hindus and Muslims in Bangladesh, and Soumya is just a first name."

That's when he said it. 

"You Bengalis are so much like Hindus!"

"Please explain." I asked him, in the mood for a good argument.

He struggled, of course.

"I ... don't know exactly," He said. "Your names. I knew a Bengali Muslim called Bijoy. That's a Hindu name. Your dresses ... Your culture ... You guys celebrate holidays like new year that is un-Islamic."

In a calm (so unlike me!) and logical manner, I tackled all his arguments (but of course he wouldn't budge from his opinion).

Typical Arrogance

Realize the statement "Bengali has a huge Hindu influence", no matter it's validity or lack thereof, comes from a base of arrogance. There is a huge arrogance amongst speakers of Urdu (and sometimes Farsi) - that they are somehow more Islamic, just by virtue of their language and lineage.

In 1952, the ruling West Pakistani elite viewed support for Urdu as support for an Islamic identity, and support for Bangla as being a traitor to "Islamic" Pakistan. Jinnah actually had the audacity to say, "Urdu embodies the best that is in Islamic culture and Muslim tradition and is nearest to the languages used in other Islamic countries." His arrogant nature was at its peak when he asked a few Bengali students, on a visit to then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), whether Bengalis could boast of any great men of letters in their history.

Pakistanis also uniquely believe Pakistan is an "Islamic" country, and therefore anyone who is Muslim should support Pakistan (and anything Pakistani, like the Urdu language). Thus Shoaib Malik infamously thanked all Muslims for supporting Pakistan in the first World T20 final when they played against India, ignoring the man of the match award which went to an Indian Muslim. Anything not seen as "Pakistani", such as the Bengali language, must therefore be non-Muslim, or Hindu.

Pride of Lineage

Urdu speaking Muslims of the South Asian subcontinent are almost always proud of their heritage. They see themselves as more Muslim, or more authentic Muslim, while the dark skinned Bengalis are seen as recent converts from Hinduism and therefore less pure. Nothing of course, could be further from the truth. Islam came to the subcontinent at roughly the same time, and whether you are a Muslim from Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or Bhutan - all of your ancestors were likely Hindus or Buddhists. The Arabs who conquered and settled in the Indian subcontinent viewed everyone as from "Hind". Yet, look what Ayub Khan, the President of Pakistan, once said.

Bengali Islam was the religion of the indigenous depressed peasant convert; in West Pakistan, Islam was the faith of the conquerors, the rulers, the courtiers. Bengali Islam was a faith associated with the "downtrodden races".

You say Hindu influence like it's a bad thing

It is obvious, undeniable and academically incorrect to say there is no Indian influence in the South Asian culture. From Peshawar to Chittagong, we have similar food, clothes, mannerisms, and so on. We all watch the same Bollywood movies and dance to the same Bollywood songs. We also have our regional variances, and thus you have Pashto, Malayalam, Bengali, Tamil etc. - multiple languages and cultures. And all these cultures have some common elements, and some variances - and within them you have people of many religions.

Where Bengali Muslims have differentiated from Urdu speaking Muslims is that even by adopting Islam, we have not lost our culture or language. In Pakistan (especially) there is a drive to Arabize themselves - seeing it as more Islamic. This was prominent under the Zia regime. When Bangladesh was part of Pakistan, they tried it on the Bengalis (and failed). In 1949 the government of East Pakistan (an Urdu speaking governor) set up a East Bengal Bhasha (Language) Committee which said Bengali should be written in Arabic script. The government saw the whole language as "corrupt" and tried to change it. The report actually stated, ""Sanskritization of the language should be avoided" and it was to exclude the Sanskrit words from Bengali and replace them by Urdu, Arabic or Persian words to “conform to the Islamic ideology”."

Bengalis reject such false standards of "Islamism".

The small stuff - cultural, not religious

So when an Urdu speaking person complains we Bengali muslims have a lot of Hindu influence, all what I said above is what is really going on. Arrogance, a false pride of lineage and Islamism, and an attempt to be Arab. Yet, of course they can point to the small stuff like our names, our dress and our celebrations. Let's get to that.

What is wrong with a name like Bijoy?

It means victory. Same as Fatih. And it has the same roots as say Nasr. Yet, is Fatih and Nasr more "Islamic", simply because it's Arab? What about the names of the famous Tabiyeen who lived during the Prophet's time, whose name was As-hum? You know him better as the Najjashi. Those are not Arabic names. Neither is Bilal. And we know Salman as a Persian name. It is a good meaning and being Muslim that makes your name Islamic, not just Arabic. And may I remind you, of the 25 prophets named in the Quran, only 4 were Arabs. The rest all had non-Arab names.

Is there anything wrong with celebrating Boishakhi?

No, not really. Depends on what you do when you "celebrate". There is nothing really Islamic, or un-Islamic, about a holiday. It's just a day with an interesting history.

However, as I said, those are the small stuff. Undeniably, we have commonalities with people who lived in our lands for centuries and share the same culture and food. No, a statement like that is not about the small stuff. It has darker roots.

And the ironic tragedy is that such arrogance, coming from a supposedly "Muslim" culture, is what broke up the largest Muslim state of the twentieth century.

 

Why Muslims Should Educate Their Women, and Learn From Them

Note: This article was first published, with minor changes for format, in The Message, the official magazine publication of the Muslim Students Association at the University of Toronto, Scarborough. To contact The Message, please email themessage@msautsc.com.

On December 7, 2013, Al Maghreb Institute, a leading institute teaching Islamic education around the world, announced a news so revolutionary, so ground breaking, that it was reported on multiple Islamic websites, channels and forums around the world. A special Youtube commercial was put out days before advertising that a revolutionary announcement was coming. There, in front of a crowd of 10,000 at an Islamic conference, Al Maghreb made the news official. Ustadha Yasmin Mogahed, a qualified Islamic speaker and scholar, was joining Al Maghreb as an instructor, and would be teaching a class on “purification of the heart”. She would become the first female instructor to join Al Maghreb.

Now, if that seems shocking, know this: Mogahed was just walking in the path trod upon by many women scholars before her; yet for some peculiar reason a female instructor teaching Islamic knowledge now seems so out of place, so wrong that it’s shocking. It wasn’t always so.

Sheikh Navaid Aziz once said, “When we look into our deep and rich history we find that women played a big role in Islamic scholarship and academia.” He quotes Abu 'Abdillah Al-Hakim (author of the Mustadrak) as saying, “If we were to abandon the narrations only found by women we would be forced to abandon a quarter of the shariah.” This indicated that not only did women attend the sermons and teachings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in the mosque, they narrated them to others after his death.

Indeed the other three quarters also have hadith narrated by both men and women. Aisha bint Abu Bakr, the young wife of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), has recounted a large number of hadith to her nephew Urwah. She also used to hold classes and lecture the masses in the mosque of the Prophet, teaching from behind a curtain. Umm al-Dardaa was another woman whom all seven compilers of Hadith (Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi, Nasaai, Ibn Majah, and Ahmad) narrated from. In the 15th century, Fatimayah al-Bataihiyyah taught Hadith in the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, and the chief male scholars of the day, from as far afield as Fez, were her students.

Some of the famous male scholars also had female scholars as their teachers. Imam Bukhari, the famous collector of Hadith, was taught by his mother, a scholar in her own right. Ibn Hajar was taught seventeen books of Hadith by Abdil Hadi, another female scholar. Ibn Hajar’s wife, Anas Khatun, regularly gave public lectures that were attended by both men and women.

Our rich history shows that women were not restricted to religious scholarship alone. While many scholars of science (such as Ibn Haitham, the father of optics) were also religious scholars, by the 9^th century students in Islamic lands had lots of options for specialization. The University of Karaouin, currently the world’s oldest university, was established by a Muslim woman in Fez, Morocco in 859 AD. Men and women studied there, as well as in Baghdad, where Caliph Mamun established the House of Wisdom – a university, a library, a research center all in one.

The jewel in the crown is the book by Sheikh Mohammad Akram Nadwi, a famous Indian scholar of fiqh, Hadith and Arabic. In 1999, he started to research on female hadith scholars, or muhaddithat, expecting to find around 20-30 such scholars throughout the 1400 years of Islamic history. Instead, in 2007 he finished writing a 53-volume book documenting the lives of over 8000 such female scholars, starting with Umm al Darda, a Companion of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Looking at all of this rich history of female scholarship, it is really a surprise that today, for Muslims and non-Muslims alike, the stock image of an Islamic scholar is an old gray bearded man. Women are seen often as victims and subjects of Islamic law, rather than its shapers and teachers. Today, many women dare not even pray in the mosque, let alone lecture leaders in them on the finer points of Islamic law. Today, there are a few Muslim countries where men shoot and kill girls as young as ten for the simple “crime” of going to school. They are not allowed to interact, study with, or talk to men. Whereas during the medieval times women used to constitute around 15% of the elite scholarship, today it’s a ground breaking news when one, ONE woman scholar is appointed to teach a single class. Such misogyny, looking from history, has no place in Islam.

The decline has several reasons. In the ninth century the Mu’tazila movement spread in the Muslim capital Baghdad, and even the Caliph was heavily influenced by Greek philosophy. As ancient Greek works and ideas encroached into Islamic thought, so did their views of women as soul less and sub human. The often cited (and scientifically nonsensical) point, “men are smarter than women” or “men are better at science” has its origins in ancient Greek philosophy.

During the tenth to the thirteenth centuries, the Muslim empires (and centres of scholarship) were under constant sustained attack by foreign forces such as the Crusaders and Mongols. Scholarship took a backseat as survival became the name of the game. In fact, many historians say the remnants of the impact of the Mongol devastation of Baghdad can still be felt today – this was the precise moment in history where the Muslims stopped their efforts to lead the world and soon (a few hundred years later), the Western world would pick up that mantle.

Today, we cannot allow this to continue. Women make up to 50% of our population and any nation that ignores half of its resources cannot be fruitful. Even Saudi Arabia recognized this, and the late King Abdullah established the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology where women were allowed to freely study and mix with men in the pursuit of knowledge.

To free our women from this intellectual bondage, and empower them, we don’t need to look far; Allah provides a glorious example in the Quran. The most manliest of all men that we know of is the Prophet Musa (Moses, peace be upon him). One Hadith says Musa (peace be upon him) once punched the Angel of Death, who had appeared in the shape of a man before him, knocking his eye out. This was the brave and fearless man who stood up to an Egyptian who he thought was torturing a Jew. This is the same Musa who single-handedly and bravely stands up against the gang men harassing Saphurah and her sister at the wells of Madian (little knowing that soon he would marry Saphurah). Such was Musa, peace be upon him.

And yet, Allah also mentions the women who all played a part in making Musa (peace be upon him) who he was. We start with his mother, who bravely takes an inspired decision and carries out Allah’s command, even if that meant abandoning her own baby in the river. Her knowledge would later benefit Musa (peace be upon him) when he would say, after killing the Egyptian, “This is from Satan. Oh Allah, forgive me.”

Miriam, his sister, is the intelligent girl who is told to follow the basket down the river. Miriam is the brave girl who follows the basket in a distance. She is living a religious life in a land where she is the oppressed minority, yet she keeps her wits about her when she finds a way to reunite mother and child, thus fulfilling the promise of Allah. Asiah, the wife of the Pharoah, and one whom the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) has said is a lady perfect in her faith, is the next woman to influence Musa (peace be upon him). She tolerates the torture of the Pharoah with patience and forbearance, praying a beautiful prayer to Allah that is mentioned in the Quran. Finally, we have the wife of Musa (peace be upon him), a woman brave enough to go out to work in a land full of dangerous men, a lady bashful and modest enough when her father sends her to fetch Musa (peace be upon him), a lady intelligent enough to spot the potential of Musa (peace be upon him) as she suggests to her father to employ him, a lady religious enough to support her now husband Musa (peace be upon him) as he begins his Prophethood ten years later.

Such were the women mentioned in the Quran as an example for us to follow, and it is about time we followed them.

Female Scholars and Female Education in Islam

Here's some images from my new book, Teaching Kids the Holy Quran - Surah 71: Nuh (Noah).

The scholar in my last book was a male character. This time around, I decided I would include the character of a female scholar, because frankly, I feel that is something being ignored in the Muslim community.

I was very happy to see pictures of a workshop (attended by both men and women) at the S. Khadija Centre mosque featuring Dr Ingrid Mattson (on February 6, 2015).

Excellent workshop with Dr. @IngridMattson & Imam @ihslimi @skcentre @DeenStudies on Islam in a N.American context. pic.twitter.com/Te7WeDbLnT
— Yūsuf Badāt (@BadatYusuf) February 7, 2015

This is in sharp contrast to one leading Islamic academic group in North America, which for the first time featured a female scholar teaching a class, but only to female students. Why? We have multiple examples of female scholars throughout history (starting with our mother Ayesha) teaching classes comprising of both male and female students. Many of us have grown up and attended high schools where we were taught by female teachers. As some of you may know, my mother was a teacher herself.

Now the question is why. Why do we ignore the capabilities of 50% of our population (this is really handicapping us!) and why have we accepted this status quo. It is interesting that one of the names and characters who appears in almost every surah is Prophet Musa (Moses, peace be upon him). He was the manliest of all men, and Allah recounts his story numerous times in the Quran. And he was surrounded by powerful women whom he learnt from and benefitted from. His own mother, his second mother who was the wife of the Pharoah, his sister, and his own wife and her sister.

Some one told me that my book could portray that the only scholarship available for women is religious learning, otherwise they should just stay home and not go to school (in some parts of the world this is the predominant view and people shoot girls going to school). Now I don't of course subscribe to this view - knowledge is the lost property of every believer, said my Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him). And every believer includes both male and female.

A Family Jummah, and Thoughts on the Women's Mosque

So this Friday I was off work, and visiting my parents. It was the time for the Friday (Jummah) prayer, and my dad asked me where I wanted to go.

 

Now my parents are lucky to live in a place that is quite close to two of the greatest mosques in Toronto. Each one is quite active in the community (fundraising for the local hospitals, for example), has reputed scholars on their roster, and is quite well managed and transparent in accountability. There is, however, one crucial difference. The first mosque has a segregated Jummah, where the main prayer hall is for men only and women pray in the gym or on the second floor (a much smaller space).

 

The second mosque, or IIT (as it is more popularly known), has a main auditorium doubling as a Jummah prayer space, and there are no barriers or separate sections for the women - everyone prays in the same space. Everyone can equally see the imam and speakers.



 

 

 

So this Friday we went to the IIT - and I realized why I loved coming to this mosque for Jummah as opposed to the other mosque.

 

The khutbah (speech) was about finding the balance in life. It was a very important, pertinent and difficult topic to speak on, but the soft spoken speaker did full justice to it. He told about how important it is to have a proper work life balance, and spend quality time with our family. He expanded on each person's roles in this - the father, the husband, the mother, the wife, the mistakes we make, the Prophetic examples and so on.

 

Now it might be a coincidence, but whenever I have attended IIT, most of their main topics for the khutbahs have been about strengthening the bonds of family, relationships, responsibilities in our community and so on. Most of the time the speeches have been very focused, and addressed to the layman, and practical, rather than an esoteric speech about some abstract theoretical concept.

 

It is just my theory, and I have no facts to back it up, but I think the fact that this is a family prayer space, rather than a men only prayer space, has a lot to do with the culture of a mosque and its community and its imam. You cannot be a misogynist, and give a khutbah making fun of the character of women, when they are RIGHT THERE staring at you in the face. Similarly, you cannot be giving speeches continuously on pie-in-the-sky topics when families are right there, and you know of their problems and you see them as a whole (not just the man) in front of you.

 

There is another big difference between the two mosques, and it's in the community. The speaker of the other mosque once actually said in a Friday speech not to bring little kids to the mosque. Apparently there's some hadith or other about this. Now I asked him several times on Twitter about this but I have had no response. This actually runs contrary to most of seerah lectures we listen to - about how the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) prayed in the mosque while his grand children played there.

 

When kids are being brought to the mosque, they are relegated to the women's section where they run around and create a chaos (being confined in a small space where they can't even see the imam or the main congregation can make you like that). Whereas, at IIT, I saw people bring their little kids to the Friday prayers. Some sat with their fathers, others with their mothers. I hardly saw any kid misbehave, and people smiled at some little children who were running around oblivious to the prayer.

 

Now my wife has been to both mosques and she agrees with me as well that the other mosque's community is less accepting as a safe space. First of all, apparently the women's section has these 'aunties' who are self-appointed guardians of purity. They attack any woman they see as less Islamic than them:

 

"Sister! Your hair is showing!" or "Sister! You should wear some loose clothes!" or "Sister! Pray like this! Not like this!"

 

Everyone seemed more concerned at the appearance of how Islamic you are rather than leaving you alone.

 

Whereas the people of IIT in general were much more refined, relaxed, polite, sophisticated and accepting.

 

Now I am not mentioning the name of the other mosque (if you live here you can guess) as it does a LOT of good work, especially in the community - such as running a food bank, a soup kitchen, inter faith etc. So I don't want this one aspect to distract from their other good work, especially sticking firmly to some fiqh principles such as not using zakat money for the mosque, relying on proper moon sighting than calculations, etc. However, it's not what I would call a family mosque. It's a man's mosque with a woman's section.

 

Thoughts on the Women's Mosque in California

 

You may have heard or read about Women's only mosque that is now being run out of an interfaith centre in California. This is what I think about it.

 

I am happy to see that right now they have made all efforts to stick to orthodox Islamic positions on most fiqh aspects. It's not an inter-gender mixed prayer led by a female - it's a female only prayer service. Yes, there were some concerns on if a Jummah is valid if it's only women, but I leave that for the scholars. Right now there is a concentrated effort to work with the broader Muslim community, and that's nice to see. On another note, if mosques continuously undermine their women congregants, they shouldn't be surprised when women take matters into their own hands.

 

So for now, I don't have any issues so far, but this is something we can keep an eye on. There are some people who want to use these sort of issues as a wedge issue in the community, and perhaps push their own so-called "progressive agenda", but it would be unfair to comment on the Women's mosque right now because nothing like that has happened yet.

 

What I would hope, and pray for, is that most mosques take this initiative as a lesson, and rectify themselves, so that rather than fighting over a man's mosque or a woman's mosque, we can make the mosque a family (community) mosque.

Junaid Jamshed, Blasphemy and Misogyny

So Junaid Jamshed, the famous former-singer-turned-preacher from Pakistan is now in trouble. One short clip from one of his many lectures has now gone viral. Here, Jamshed recounts a story that happened to Aisha and her husband the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Aisha was the favourite of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and would always try to seek his attention. One day she decided to fake illness by wrapping a towel around her head.

“What happened, what happened?” inquired Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

“Ah, my head is bursting with pain!” she complained.

To which, he said, “Oh Aisha, if you were to pass away, the Prophet of God would personally offer your funeral prayers. How fortunate would you be!”

She stood up at once and raged, “This is what you ardently desire - that I die, so you could spend more time with your other wives!”

Jamshed goes on to say that the nature of women cannot be changed even by Prophet.

Now apparently this is a blasphemy as per Pakistani laws. A blasphemy against the character of Aisha, the Mother of the Faithful, may Allah be pleased with her.

First of all, I don't think the story is correct. I remember reading about this particular incident, and it happened during the last few days of the life of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). He was sick, he was on his deathbed, and he entered the room of his beloved wife Aisha. She too had fallen sick, and she was complaining "My head! My head!". So then he told her, "Nay! It is I who has to cry my head! My head!"

And then Aisha complained, "Ah, my head is bursting with pain!”

To which, he replied with tenderness, “Oh Aisha, if you were to pass away, the Prophet of God would personally offer your funeral prayers. How fortunate would you be!”

And then she playfully gave the reply, "And that is what you want! After you bury me, you will return to the house and spend your time with another wife!"

The story completely changes here - rather than someone seeking attention and pretending to be sick, this is a story of a loving back-and-forth between a couple who are comfortable and romantic with each other. It's a beautiful story of love.

So Jamshed, in an attempt to portray the allegedly "frivolous and fragile nature of women that even the Prophet couldn't change", twisted this story around to make Aisha an attention seeking woman.

Second, even if we give Jamshed his version of the story (which is wrong), is it blasphemy? The people around the Prophet, such as members of his own family, were human after all. They all had human failings. Sauda, his second wife, once made a comment after the Battle of Badr that the Prophet corrected, as it was a comment of Jahiliyyah. There was an anti-Semitic comment directed once at his wife Safiyya bint Huyayy, who was of Jewish origin, by another wife - which he also corrected. It is not blasphemy to say the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) sometimes made minor human mistakes for which they were forgiven by Allah, and which serve as examples for us.

And finally, are we so caught up on what Junaid Jamshed said about Aisha, that we completely ignore his sustained record of misogyny and disrespect towards women?

Now I first saw Junaid Jamshed when he came to Muslimfest in 2011.

He gave some speeches and talked about a few incidents from the life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), sang some nasheeds and closed of with Dil Dil Pakistan, which the crowd loved. He repeated the act every time he was invited to Muslimfest subsequently. One could be forgiven for thinking he is a scholar of the seerah or someone who has studied extensively on religion.

Here is an interview where he is telling men not to teach their wives driving. He is praising himself for not teaching his wife (coincidentally also named Aisha) driving, and he tells men that one good thing they will do is not let their wives drive. The interviewer then asks what if a woman has no one to drive her (her husband has died and she has no relatives to help her out or they are busy), is she to remain helpless and not drive. To which Jamshed of course has no answer but then says this is just a hypothetical situation and he doesn't answer hypotheticals.

Jamshed of course has done a lot of good and called a lot of people to Islam. We can take the good from him and ignore the bad. But let's call out the bad - the misogyny and the shaming of women. In the offending video, for which he is now charged with blasphemy, he goes on about the nature of women.

He is of course a product of his culture and Pakistani culture isn't one where a woman is empowered. But that is of course not Islamic culture, and today we have forgotten that. The average Muslim has outsourced the religion to these pseudo-scholars and ignored learning of their own religion and history. it used to be that Islamic scholars were experts in both science and religion, and were the smartest of the class. Today, it's usually the low achievers and failures of the class that are hustled into the madrassahs and religious schools. So when these scholars say something bogus (such as woman cannot drive), then the average (and now) ignorant Muslim doesn't have the knowledge to fact check this. And when these scholars are given to positions of power (a sign of the Last Days), they make laws to that effect. So religion, rather than becoming a solution, is now the problem.

Our religion and culture is one that produced Umm Salamah, who set out on a camel to travel alone from Makkah to Madinah. It has Nusaibah, a woman who took the oath of Aqabah and fought in the Battle of Uhud with a sword, and fought in subsequent battles after. Our history includes Khawla bint Thalabah, whose complaint against her husband was heard by Allah and is mentioned in Surah Mujadilah, and whom the Caliph Umar used to listen to respectfully as she lectured him on Islam.

Let us not use the hullaballoo over a stupid blasphemy law in Pakistan (which is used mostly to settle scores with minorities and make their lives miserable - a sad fact of history in Pakistan) to excuse the bigger problem at play - the misogyny in the culture that holds back half the population and forces on them a false understanding of male privilege in the guise of religion.

Why (Many) Muslims Have a Problem With (Most) Feminists

Yes. This is a very general, stereotyping and broad article. Read "The Way Forward" at the end.

Feminists. They used to be a good thing. Even Muslim feminists. At one stage of my life, I was very sympathetic to Muslim feminists. And who couldn't be? The way many women were treated in the Muslim countries (sometimes due to a history of colonial oppression and sometimes due to a lack of proper Islamic scholarship) would make anyone a Muslim feminist. Women are not allowed to attend mosques (places in Bangladesh), not allowed to vote or drive (Saudi Arabia), suffer domestic abuse (Pakistan) and don't have access to education (Afghanistan). Then some of those misogynistic folks running the establishment there immigrated to the West and brought their cultural baggage dressed as Islam here. Walk into any mosque run by "uncles", and you will become a Muslim feminist. Where is the women's prayer area? Oh, the broom closet. Why don't you have women on your Shariah board? Why can't women see the imam? Etc. and etc.

And yet, something started to give. Despite the myriad of issues that could raise support for their cause, Muslim feminists started to become shunned by most Muslims. I too started to develop a distaste for them, their writings and their fights. Ultimately it cultivated in me writing on Why Muslim Feminists Don't Win. After more than a year of reflection, I have come to the following conclusions on why most Muslims, even (and especially) the educated, young and liberal ones from the West, don't care for (most) Muslim feminists.

Insulting Respected Scholars and Using Derogative Terms for Them

No scholar, no matter how educated, knowledgeable, experienced or intelligent, can be hundred percent correct all the time. Similarly, you will not find a scholar whose views you agree with completely all the time. We are all human and the one perfect human being, the final Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (peace be upon him), lived more than 1400 years ago and is no more. It is possible that a scholar today may have mountains of knowledge in one area, but say a completely stupid thing in another field.

This does NOT negate his (or her) expertise in other areas or disregard a lifetime of work. However, when a typical Muslim feminist encounters a scholar whose views (particularly on women, on gender relations etc.) they disagree with - suddenly this scholar is a dinosaur, a relic, a fossil, or worse.

During the whole AbuEesaGate, many scholars took issue with what Abu Eesa had to say, while some others (sadly) defended him. Some Muslim Feminists cheered those scholars that rebuked Abu Eesa as "allies" and "men who get it". It would have been similarly possible to disagree with the scholars who defended Abu Eesa in a polite manner - yet if you peruse many Muslim feminist blogs (and comments), many of them had harsh words and resorted to name calling of these scholars, and completely disregarding their work in other fields or even according them the respect that any scholar deserves. Calling someone's fatwa or Facebook posts "misogynist" or "having a frat boy mentality" or even "disgusting" is fair; however when you go into insulting the scholar themselves by calling them "vultures", "predators" etc. or their work as "public excretions", then you have crossed a line.

Insulting the Sahabah (Companions) and the Hadith

Many Muslim feminists reserve special vitriol for the Companion Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him). Not only did this man record the most hadith, he also narrated some sayings that sharply go against the Western mindset of many feminists. They love to quote Dr Abou El Fadl's position on Abu Hurairah, where the professor apparently says (in his book) that this Companion has transmitted sayings that "denigrate the moral status of women". Similarly, many of such feminists openly denounce hadith which rubs them the wrong way, or try to belittle the Companion that has narrated the hadith. Most Muslims revere the Companions. We do not hold them as a perfect specimen (they are humans after all) but they were the best generation. For 1200 of the 1400 years of Islamic history, their values and their teachings have caused Muslims to rule the world; it is inconceivable that for all these years Muslims were missing something that some feminist has suddenly discovered with her keen eye.

Picking and Choosing Islam

Islam is not a buffet that you pick the things you like and ignore what you don't. If you are a Muslim, you accept the religion as a whole. This goes back to the previous point where some feminists try to cherry pick hadith which suits them, and ignore or try to classify as "weak" the ones they hate. Here's a classic example - a hadith that is widely shared by many feminists.

When Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was travelling on the road with his cousin, Al-Fadl ibn Abbas, a woman stopped him to ask him a question. The woman was very beautiful, and Al-Fadl couldn’t help but stare at her. Seeing this, Prophet Muhammad reached out his hand and turned his cousin’s face away. - Bukhari Volume 8, Book 74, Number 247

He didn’t tell the woman to cover her face.
He didn’t tell her to change her clothing.
He didn’t tell her that her appearance was too tempting or indecent.
He averted his cousin’s impolite stare instead.

Note the emphasis (and added conclusions) that is attached to this hadith. It implies that a woman can dress as she wants, and if a man stares it's his fault. Yet, this ignores the numerous times that the Prophet (pbuh) has asked women (and men) to dress modestly, to make sure their appearance isn't indecent, and so on. It's even there in the Quran when Allah talks about how one of the daughters of the old man of Madian approached Musa (peace be upon him) - "She walked shyly".

Subverting and Changing Islam

In the 1400 years of Islamic history, you will not find a single, reputable scholar or madhab that had women leading a mixed congregation prayer. Yet this is a common cause celebre for many radical Muslim feminists - despite it having zero support from the average Muslim. Similarly they now wish to change Quranic laws on inheritance, while ignoring their reasons, or polygamy, or the very fact that these laws are coming from God Himself. Apparently God failed to understand the changes society would be undertaking in the 21st century, nauzubillah! Similarly the hijab is targeted, or the fact that Allah put the responsibility of earning a family's income primarily on the men, and so on. They now openly cheer on a woman's staying single as long as she wants (neglecting the Islamic injunction to get married as soon as feasible), or a woman's choosing career over her family or kids (despite the immense Islamic rewards attached with motherhood).

Lack of Adaab

If you refer to my post on Love Inshallah where I expound on my view that Muslims (men and women) should marry young, and women who are delaying their marriage are harming themselves, it elicited a ton of responses and comments. Most of the negative comments came from women (and those who are the Muslim feminist type) and the majority of these resorted to name calling, insults, derogatory terms and so on. And I am hardly a good example to use - several sheikhs and scholars have felt the brunt of these insults by the supposedly "enlightened and liberated" women. Yes, disagree with our views, bring your own, but why the vitriol? One famous feminist writer (who does not have any scholarly credentials for analyzing hadith but writes about them all the time) wrote about why she felt "unmosqued". Then she posted a private message from someone who asked her to get educated on hadith before writing about it, and made fun of this man. And others (her supporters) joined in the insults and name calling. And then they wonder why the rest of the Ummah completely ignores them!

Associating With Known Islamophobes

This one hardly needs a write up.

The Way Forward

This article is of course very general and broad. There are tons of Muslim feminists who are doing good (and great work). Wood Turtle and the Salafi Feminist are two women whose writings and work I very much admire, even if I don't agree with their views at times. The very fact that Muslim women are suffering in Muslim countries (and in Western institutions run by sometimes chauvinistic men) is not up for debate - it's true, and it's happening. Here are some things that happen in some of the mosques in Toronto that I have personally witnessed:

1. The women's prayer area is shut off and there is a physical barrier which prevents them from seeing the imam, contrary to the sunnah.
2. When there is a big crowd (such as Eid), the women lose their prayer area and are relegated to the basement (or gym).
3. Many mosques have no women on their advisory committee.

The way forward has to involve dialogue and education, and the pace of change will be slow. For example, Toronto has two great mosques (the Islamic Institute of Toronto, and the Sayeda Khadija Centre) which not only has great facilities for women, but also follow the sunnah style of prayer where women share the space with men and can see the imam. They have access to the scholars. Imam Hamid Slimi is a fantastic, down-to-earth man who is a jewel in the Islamic scholarship of Toronto. They understand the community and understand the needs and requirements of the community, and the change is happening in an inclusive manner which listens to concerns from all affected stakeholders and the changes are in accordance with the classical understanding of Islamic law. By insulting the imams, denigrating hadith, rebuking men and trying to change traditional Islam to suit Western sensibilities, many Muslim feminists risk doing more harm than good.

How Al Maghrib Blew It

It is the situation every organization dreads. Some important executive within the company, or a high profile representative, makes a misogynistic, sexist, crude joke and an indefensible statement. The resulting reaction then goes viral, dragging the company's name down with it. Pressure grows on the organization to do "something" and to clarify where they stand.

In those cases, as a company you have two choices. You either move immediately, sharply distancing yourself from the  offending statements while at the same time appropriately disciplining your employee, and keep yourself accountable. It is an opportunity to prove yourself in the limelight, to demonstrate your integrity and to keep yourself accountable.

Or you try to hide and hope the situation blows away. You can issue a half non-apology or even fight back and defend the speaker, calling those who pointed out the rampant sexism and misogyny names and insults. There will be no sanction of your employee. It implicitly sends out a signal that such statements and jokes are appropriate, fit the company culture and that the criticism of your organization is actually correct.

Al Maghrib Institute, a widely respected association of sheikhs who teach Islamic courses throughout the world, found itself amidst such a dilemma on the weekend. Abu Eesa, one of their sheikhs, posted the following on twitter and Facebook.

 

If this was a "joke", it was retweeted by many of his followers. I thought at first someone pasted the photo of the sheikh as a false allegation - I was dumbfounded to see it was an actual post by him! And his twitter had a series of other posts.

 Joking about women was bad enough. The second twitter plays to the stereotype that women are bad drivers. The third one where talks about ""stick that in your oven and cook it"" is a dismissive mentality that some men have about women. These tweets were bad enough. However, a post soon surfaced about where he "jokes" about raping women.

No matter what the context, you just can't joke about raping women! Especially, AS A SHEIKH and ISLAMIC SCHOLAR, you cannot be giving out fatwas lightly or in jest! AND especially fatwas that says go ahead and rape! (I am ignoring the disgusting FGM mention here).

Of course, women did not keep quiet. And neither did many men. And the resulting outrage resulted in even more non-apology posts by our "sheikh".

 

Now this was high time Al Maghrib stepped in. Sheikh Abu Eesa is part of Al Maghrib Institute and their good name was being sullied and dragged through the mud by association. For a long time, despite calls for a reaction, their twitter post remained silent. Ironically, the last post was actually a tweet about a Sheikh Abu Eesa course.

 

Finally, there was a post.

 

Yes, we now know that Al Maghrib celebrated International Women's Day by talking about Muslim women who are our role models. This could have been a good first step, but it's still talk. Sheikh Abu Eesa made fun of International Women's Day, which Al Maghrib purportedly respects. The important question remains: what about Sheikh Abu Eesa and his comments?

 

Sheikh Waleed Basyouni of Al Maghrib Institute then posted on facebook.

 

This was a cop-out. It did not do any of the things a good response should have done. There was
a) no acknowledgement of guilt
b) no acknowledgement of hurt caused
c) no discipline or sanction of the guilty person
d) no condemnation of the offending statements

Instead, we saw the first signs of a fight back. He said he hates taking a statement out of context or blowing a joke out of proportion. Sorry sheikh, I respect your knowledge and your ilm, but even a man of limited knowledge like me understands that joking about raping women, female genital mutilation or stereotyping women is completely unacceptable. Had Sheikh Abu Eesa worked in any normal corporation in the West, these would be firing offenses.

And then Sheikh Yasir Qadhi, a sheikh whose knowledge I benefit greatly from, and whose seerah lectures are extremely detailed, posted an absolutely shocking facebook post.

Note, there was no reference to Sheikh Abu Eesa or his comments or the whole fiasco in the post. I actually sent him a tweet asking him to clarify what he is talking about. With no response, and given the nature of his tweet, the timing, and his recent endorsement of Sheikh Abu Eesa's Syria fatwa, I can only assume this tweet (and Facebook post) is about the current situation. And therein lies the problem.

Sheikh Abu Eesa is compared to a Companion of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who made a mistake, and those criticizing him are being compared to the enemies of Allah, the Quraish, who plotted to kill and assassinate the Prophet and wipe out the Muslims (i.e. a bigger mistake). So, if you found the tweets of Sheikh Abu Eesa misogynistic, sexist and offensive, guess what, you are an enemy of Allah. The Sheikh's sexists tweets - yes, they were bad, but you, by complaining about it, made a bigger faux pa and sin!

UPDATED: As of right now (1040 am Tuesday), there is still no post apologizing for his actions by either Sheikh Abu Eesa or Al Maghrib Institute. In fact, Sheikh Abu Eesa seems to have taken delight at the outrage and his non-apology post on facebook is amazingly even more vile.

This was a chance for Al Maghrib to demonstrate that such sexist and anti-women attitudes have no place in Islam and gets no encouragement from educated, Western scholars. Instead, they seem to have closed ranks to defend Sheikh Abu Eesa and call out anyone who finds his "jokes" offensive.

SOMETHING ABOUT ME: I am not what you would call a feminist. I am a guy who is of the opinion that a woman CANNOT lead prayers in a mixed congregation, and I do not think a non-mahram woman and a man should stand beside each other and pray. This is a classical, orthodox position held by the mainstream Muslim body. I think Amina Wadud is very much in the wrong. I agree completely with Allah's orders in the Quran regarding inheritance (of course, special circumstances can be evaluated by a reputed and learned scholar on a case-by-case basis). My post where I encourage Muslims to get married early by the age of 24 was hated by many feminists who called me (and my family) all types of names. I brush off their insults because a man calling to Allah's way will be insulted like Musa (pbuh) was insulted.

Yet. the truth is the truth, and the truth is that Sheikh Abu Eesa's statements crossed a line and he should have been sanctioned. I am not going to call for his firing and did not join the #fireAbuEesa hashtag because I don't like to knock a man's livelihood. He could have been given sensitivity training and taught the importance of moderating what you say as a public figure and a religious leader. Instead, I have been lumped into a "feminazi" camp by Sheikh Abu Eesa and a "Quraish" camp by Sheikh Yasir Qadhi and a "blown out of proportion" camp by Al Maghrib Institute while the sheikhs close ranks around one of their own and permit a frat boy mentality amongst the so-called premier religious educational institute in the West.

Such an act only harms Islam, ya shuyookh. Even a man of limited knowledge like me can see that, so why can't you all?

MORE LINKS ON THIS ISSUE:

• Wa'Mutasima!

UPDATE:

• Al Maghrib Statement on the controversy
• Abu Eesa apology to men, women and jinn
• Yasir Qadhi's later MM blog post on the controversy