Urdu Bayaand Raiwind 2/12/2010

Urdu Bayans from Raiwind Tableeghi Ijtemaa will be broadcast LIVE on the following sites:
http://alittehaad.org/
http://www.thebestislam.com/
http://www.islahunnisa.com/Dates/Times are as follows:
Thursday the 2nd of December 2010 after Maghrib (17:00 PST): Click Here to convert o your local Time
Friday the 3rd of December & Saturday the 04th of December 2010:
After Fajar (05:45 PST)Click Here to convert o your local Time
After Dhohar (13:30 PST)Click Here to convert o your local Time
After Maghrib (17:00 PST)Click Here to convert o your local Time
Sunday the 05th of December 2010:
After Fajar (05:45 PST)Click Here to convert o your local Time
Hidayaat (roughly 09:00 PST) Click Here to convert o your local Time
Dua after the Ijtema (roughly 10:00 PST) Click Here to convert o your local Time

Dont Break My Heart O Haji

Dont break my heart Oh Haji

Don’t break my heart O Hajī!
I drink from your zam I eat from your dates, I ask you for your prayers but
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
O Hājī, tell me not of the day you donned your iḥrām or of the time when you first saw the holy kaʿbah.
Of when you made the tawāf, or when you ran from safa to marwā.
Of when you first sipped from zam zam and when you prayed at the Maqām of Ibrahim alaihis salām.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! O Don’t break my heart O Hajī!
O Ḥājī tell me not of the day you walked to Mina or of when you cried at Arafāt.
Of when you stayed at Muzdalifah or when you pelted the Jamarāt
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
O Hajī tell me not of when you slaughtered your animal or when you shaved your head.
Of when you made the tawaf with millions or when you gave thanks to your Rabb.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
O Hājī tell me not of when with heavy heart you make your tawāf al-wida and when you prayed to your hearts fill.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
O Ḥājī, most of all, tell me not of the moment when you glimpsed at the green domed sanctuary, or when you entered the Prophet ṣallallāhu ʿalahi wasallam’s city.
Of when you entered the haram al-Nabawī or of when you first prayed there.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
O Ḥājī tell me not of when you cried besides yourself as you presented yourself at the blessed Rawdah or of what you whispered to your Nabī ʿalaihi ṣalām.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
O Ḥāji, tell me not of promises made of resolutions kept and of pledges or of a life changed forever nor of an indelible mark on the soul.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.
So as I sip of your zam and eat from your dates, I ask you for your prayers that I be called too O Ḥājī, that I be called soon O Ḥājī, for what’s the use of a broken heart O Ḥājī.
Don’t break my heart O Hajī! Don’t break my heart.

AD Pretoria. 18/11/10 /10 Dhul Hijjah 1431

DR FA Ganchi

DR F A GANCHI



Dr. F. A. Ganchi (my client) was detained by Egyptian Authorities on Friday 23rd January 2009 until Monday 26th January 2009 and was returned back to South Africa on Tuesday 27th January 2009.

My client had obtained the necessary authority to travel with the Gift of the Givers Mission to Gaza, and endorsed by the Department of Foreign Affairs, South Africa. My client was previously arrested in Pakistan and released without charge and this fact was known to all who were part of the mission and who had endorsed same also. My client successfully applied for the necessary visa permitting him to enter Egypt and a valid copy of the visa remains in his passport.

My client wishes to apologize to the remaining members of the mission, who travelled to Gaza for the purposes of rendering humanitarian assistance, to the extent that they were in any way compromised, prejudiced or delayed in their effort. My client appreciates the fact that the Mission and all its members stood by him during this time. My client also regrets that he was not an active participant in the planned humanitarian work intended to be performed in Gaza, but remains hopeful that there will be other opportunities for same. Despite my client’s efforts and those of the South African Government, my client still does not know the reason/s for his detention and his return to South Africa.

On departure from O. R. Tambo International Airport my client was briefly held back but was subsequently cleared to travel. My client was similarly held back for a short while at the Cairo Airport but was subsequently cleared to proceed to Rafah without any questioning. My client subsequently passed numerous checkpoints between Cairo and Rafah without difficulty. Whilst offloading the vehicle at Rafah my client was summoned by 2 (two) intelligence agents who advised him that they were conducting a routine check on him and subsequently changed this to a problem with my client’s passport. My client requested these individuals to clarify any complications with the South African Embassy. My client was thereafter summoned to collect his luggage and was driven to an unknown venue where he was handcuffed to a bench for approximately 5 (five) hours. My client repeatedly made demands to ascertain why he was being detained and was provided with no answers whatsoever. My client was forced to spend the entire night handcuffed to a bench. My client was advised by a junior officer that he was to be returned to Cairo shortly. On Saturday 24th January 2009 my client was transported in the back of a police truck to Cairo. The journey was approximately 12 (twelve) hours in length with no provisions provided to client. Client was blindfolded and handcuffed and the blindfold and handcuffs were only removed upon his departure at 23h30 on the 26th January 2009. My client accepts that he was taken to Cairo, yet has no actual knowledge that this was infact the case. On arrival at Cairo my client was stripped and searched and interrogated about his travels to Pakistan previously till the early part of Sunday morning. No provision was made for client to sleep and he was forced to sleep in the corridor of what he believes to have been an intelligence holding/interrogation facility. The facility in which client was detained was not clean, crowded and smelt like a mortuary. Client repeatedly heard the sounds of the administration of electric shocks and painful human screams immediately thereafter. The facility was so crowded that whilst being moved around in the corridors, client would inevitably trample on other people who were being held at the same facility. On Sunday 25th January 2009 client was moved internally to an isolation facility, still handcuffed and blindfolded. Client was then interrogated again during the course of Monday afternoon, with no real purpose in the questioning. Late on Monday evening client was transported to the airport in Cairo and his blindfold and handcuffs was removed approximately 5 (five) minutes prior to arrival at the airport. My client arrived at O. R. Tambo International Airport on Tuesday 27th January 2009.

My client, as you can well imagine is hugely disappointed by not having been able to actively participate in the humanitarian work, for which the mission was planned by Gift of the Givers, a reputable aid organization with a proven track record but remains hopeful that he will be able to assist in other areas where such aid is needed in the future.

My client is further hugely disappointed by the actions of the Egyptian Authorities but remains hopeful that they will see the error in their ways. My client is grateful to the South African Department of Foreign Affairs, both locally and in Egypt, who assisted tremendously in this time of need. My client is grateful to all of those people who prayed and showed support for him and his family during this time.

Finally, my client read with disappointment, the various newspaper articles that appeared in the written press after his return to South Africa, the reference to his previous detention in Pakistan during 2004. The fact of that matter is simply that my client was released without being charged despite having being interrogated for a period of 5 (five) months by South African, Pakistani and American Intelligence.




Y. TAYOB ATTORNEY

Humourous Anti-Wahhabi Site

http://najd2.wordpress.com/

Id Bayaan 1 October 2008: Ashraf Dockrat

Id Bayaan [1 October 2008/1 Shawwaal 1429]

As we gather here on this blessed day, greeted on our way here by the malaaikah, the angels of Allah who welcome us here and greet us again as we part from this Id ghah, we realize that we are united here in purpose. On this occasion where we give thanks we do so in a gathering of Muslims that shows strength and unity. This concept of unity is the topic of our talk this morning.

In a hadith Rasulallah sallallahu alaihi wasallam is reported to have said: This Din (religion) of Islam began in strangeness and will once again be strange. Glad tidings to those who are the strangers.

What constitutes the strangeness of Islam today?
Muslims find themselves in different parts of the world with nothing to unite them.
Muslims find themselves divided by ethnicity, race and tribal affiliations.
All of this despite the hadith of the Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam which states: All of you are from Adam and Adam was from clay. And that there is no preference for the Arab over the non-Arab accept in taqwa (God conciousness).
Strangeness is nowhere stronger when one group of Muslims are actively involved in battle with another without religious justification. When in Palestine Hamas and Fatah are at loggerheads while the Israeli occupation of the blessed lands continues with all its barbarity.
What can be a greater expression of strangeness when a Muslim leader asks for help from the enemies of Allah to fight fellow Muslims. When Pakistan allows its airspace to be used to attack Afghanistan and when Muslim countries in the middle-east allow the military bases of the enemies of Allah on Muslim lands. Muslims forget the command of Allah: You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the last day befriending those who oppose Allah and his Rasul even if it is against their fathers, brothers or family.

Disunity and weakness has been predicted by Rasul sallallahu alaihi wasallam when he said that people would gather around you as people gather to eat a meal, or that you will be like the flotsam and jetsum of a flood in your weakness. When the Prophet was asked about this disastrous condition of the Muslims, he explained that this was not because of their small numbers, rather they will be many. This weakness will be because they love the world and dislike death.

Disunity has weakened our affair to the extent that non-Muslims ask that if Islam was a true religion they will not be disunited and so far from the means of strength even.

What strangeness is worse than the situation where the voices of those that call to unity and strength seem strange and foreign? There can be no greater strangeness than this.

Are we not on account of the Din and Shariah we possess the most deserving of respect, honour, knowledge, virtue and progress? We are the direct inheritors of the Propeht sallallahu alaihi wasallam and the Sahabah. Has the time not come when Muslims have to regain their lost status and hold onto their mission and awaken from their slumber?

Let us for a moment reflect on Europe. Each of the countries are strong, nevertheless they have put their differences aside to form the European Union. United by a common currency these disparate countries have united. The Euro and the common economic system they have is for all to see. This is cause to reflect. We are divided and Muslim countries as at each other’s throats. We deprive one another of food and support and we yet claim to be under the shade of one Din. We have become the prey of wolves? Where are our leaders? And what are their concerns?

It is essential for Muslims to introspect. We have to in the face of this injustice hold onto the rope of Allah and unite our voices. We have to unite ourselves under the banner of Lailaha illallah Muhammadur rasul lullah. There is nothing greater to remove the disunity and friction than this. Achieving unity should be the concern of every individual of the ummah. Every journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. What is this first step? It is to know the rights and responsibilities of your fellow Muslim. It is to acknowledge the huquq al-ibād and to assert our brotherhood. “Certainly the Muslims are brothers, so join (fa aslihu) between your brothers”.

If we ponder over this concept of ukhuwwah al-Islamiyyah (Muslim Brotherhood) we will see that it is the most difficult call to Muslims today. If we realize what Din is and we Understand Din and practice on it (amal) we will love for our brothers what we love for ourselves. We will dislike for them what we dislike for ourselves, resist those actions that cause him/her harm, care for the sick and weak and help and give service to those as best we can. There can be no place for zulm at all.

Din al-Islam has two essentials that are fundamental and foundational:
tawhid 2, Equality between people.

If this is achieved we will achieve success. We have to realize that this is where the solution lies and try our best to achieve this.

Unity is not a concept about which we have a choice about. It is a fard of Din. Allah says: “And do not be like those who became disunited and broke into groups after clear signs came to them and for them is a great punishment” and Allah Ta’ala says: “And this ummah of yours is one ummah and I am your Lord so worship me.”

All scholars (here we are not referring to pseudo-scholars who hope that a Mahdi will appear and solve all the problems we face) are concerned with how this unity of the ummah can be achieved. The slipping of the Khilafah from the hands of the Musims meant disunity between Muslims. The matter has gone so far that Muslims lifted sword against Muslim. How many khutbahs and how many books have not been written analyzing this phenonomenon and providing solutions for achieving a united ummah.

We are not here talking about differences of fiqh and law. These differences existed from the time of the sahabah and are a blessing. Those that call for the abandonment of taqlid and see Muslims unity in a common jurisprudence have a very shallow understanding of the problem or the solution.

It is the wisdom of Allah that people have not been united into what the Quran calls a single people. Instead Allah tells us that who He blesses he unites on truth. “If Allah so desired he would have created mankind into one nation and you will continue differences accept who your Lord has blessed and for this reason Allah created you and fulfilled the word of your Lord that He will fill Jahnnam with people and Jinn” (Hud: 118-119). Ibn Abbas (RA) in his tafsir of this verse says that Allah created them for mercy not for differences. Muslims have to hold fast onto obedience to Nabi sallallahu alaihi wasallam. What is disliked is fanacticism and intolerance especially in matters where difference of opinion and positions are perfectly allowed and accommodated in the shariah.

As for matters of aqidah then all the sahabah where like a single solid wall firm of tawhid and the oneness of Allah. This made the ummah strong and they gained ascendency. Decline set in after this period. A decline that no Muslim can be happy with. When the capital of the Muslim world was Baghdad already a weakness started creeping in. There is weakness in consultation with other Muslims in other parts of the Muslim lands i.e. a weakness in administration and there was weakness in the concept of tawhid and belief amongst Muslims. The fatal blow was when in 656 AH the Tartars invaded the Muslim lands. Muslims were united again when the Uthmaniyyah Khilafah/ Dawlah united many disparate Islamic peoples and lands. However once again the failure to establish tawhid in the lands led to their fall. The European Colonialist found their way to the Muslim lands, assaulted these lands and occupied the land and the thought of its inhabitants. They became worst than what they were. Yet many sincere Muslims continued to be concerned with the situation of the Muslim ummah.

What we have to do is study carefully what unites us and remove the cause of division.

We have seen that the aqidah of tawhid and the fact that we are united on one aqidah and on one concern that emanates from it. We share a common vision and world view which unites us wherever we are on the globe and whatever the social, economic or ecological challenges humankind may be facing.

The first step then is to identify those obstacles which come in the way of achieving unity:

The first of these obstacles is the stagnation of many of the Muslim communities. Movement and activity is a solution to many problems.

There is also a strong relationship between freedom and unity. Sometimes these two concepts find themselves in opposition to one another. The lack of freedom and the resultant discontent because of the oppressive regimes who restrict these freedoms is the reason for much disunity. Good Muslims languish for years under horrendous conditions in prisons in Muslim countries. The disunity, the call for Jihad and the opposition to the corrupt leadership is a reason for disunity.

The inability to recognize that what is relatively insignificant and temporary needs to be sacrificed for what is permanent, important and fundamental. At times this requires sacrifices from some groups that is no less than the sacrifice of a shahid of his life for the cause of islam. The requirement for this is a strong Imaan and a good understanding of Islam.

Another no less significant cause for disunity is the economic disparity in the Muslim world which makes unity a pipe dream for most. In this regard it is significant to note that only 4% of the economic activity of the Muslim countries is between Muslim countries themselves while 96% of the economic activity of Muslim countries is with non-Muslims. A Muslim cannot find and source all his needs from Muslim countries and is forced to go to the West.

Disunity is also caused by the export of foreign culture and values to the Muslim countries.

The rise of nationalistic sentiments and false notions of nationhood and patriotism has been the cause of disunity after the decline of the Uthmanli Dawlah. Personal interests and narrow parochial thinking took preference over what was important and relevant to the ummah at large.

These are some of the challenges we have to face. Some are inheritied some are intractable yet it remains a fard and a requirement of shariah to achieve unity at all costs. As people concerned with the welfare of the ummah we all have to work together to put bricks into the wall of the unity of Islam.

Now that we have seen the obstacles let us move to the imperatives which have to drive us in order to realize the blessed unity. A unity based on a common worldview.

Firstly our aqidah is one. The risalah of Nabi Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wasallam and the accompanying worry and concern that he had for the salvation of the ummah and of all of mankind is one. The Shariah is one. What then can be the reasons for our disunity?

Secondly we should be united by a common language which is Arabic. It is Arabic that carries our common ideas, our united culture, the thoughts of the Quran and sunnah and the legacy of Islam. Similarly the Arab nations need to learn the languages of millions of Muslims such as Urdu in order to better relate to their brothers.

Thirdly, we need to unite in professional associations and guilds. Tradesmen, doctors, lawyers, economists and academics need to pool their resources locally, nationally and internationally.

Fourthly it is necessary for us to have a common sense of daʿwah and a common support for duʿāt. In fact we all need to feel the responsibility to invite non-Muslims to Allah. Our daʿwah needs to include the concern for the socio-economic concerns of humanity. In our country where people go to bed hungry regularly and where there are child-headed households as a common occurrence, we need to be more concerned with daʿwah. We will be united through our common concern.

Fifthly we need to create centres of concern. Centres devoted to the concern of uniting the ummah and humanity. Every masjid needs to be transformed into a markaz to fulfill this task.

The sixth point we need to make is that of economics. We need to realize that very often in our modern world the political system serves as a slave and an adjunct to the capitalist economic system. Muslims need to provide leadership by providing just and fair economic systems and encourage trade and economic support for Muslims throughout the globe.

Lastly we need to think about how the Muslim world and the Muslim lands can achieve unity. For this we need the political will which has always been the hallmark of Muslims and their administrations.

In conclusion let us remember that there is no magic wand of unity. There is no Sultan with great power that can achieve this unity. Unity between Muslims in every part of the world can be achieved through unity in method and through justice. We all have a part to play in achieving this unity. Islam is ours. We have to share a common worldview. A worldview that insists that every person on the face of the earth should enter jannah. We have to take possession of that common worldview based on a love for humanity.

Yes this is a difficult task. It requires ikhlaas and sincerity. But remember: Every journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.

Id Mubarak!

The Madrasa Curriculum and System and Modern Demands

The Madrasa Curriculum and System and Modern Demands
By Maulana Rizwan ul-Qasmi (Administrator, Dar ul-Ulum Sabil us-Salam, Hyderabad, India)
(Translated by Yoginder Sikand)

The Quran is the last Divine revelation, and has been sent by God for all humanity. It will remain without any change or modification whatsoever till the Day of Judgment, for the Prophet Muhammad is the last of the prophets. The religion as represented in the Quran is eternal, and so are the Quran’s laws, its shariah, its knowledge and the need and the value of this knowledge.
But this does not at all mean that time has stopped forever and that conditions will never change. Rather, change is permanent. The demands of the age were subject to change in the past, and this applies even today. And just as in the past considerations were made to suit the then prevailing conditions, so, too, today in our interpretation of what God has entrusted to us those aspects that are subject to change must be kept in mind. Hence, madrasas must be mindful of contemporary conditions, needs and demands and keep the torch of the knowledge of the Faith burning in the light of all these factors. This, in fact, was the aim behind the founding of one of the first and, in many senses, unique madrasas in India following the collapse of Muslim rule in the country—the Dar ul Ulum at Deoband. This madrasa was not established simply to teach a few subjects. If its historical context is carefully studied, it appears that it aimed at addressing contemporary challenges as well, and that it had taken upon itself the task of the interpretation and expression of the Faith in the context of the changed conditions of the times in order to keep alive the torch of Islam in the face of fierce storm of Western atheism and materialism. Several other madrasas also soon emerged at this time that carried on with this mission.

There can be no doubt that these madrasas managed, with considerable success, to fulfill their duty of testifying to the Truth and communicating the teachings of the Faith. Many of the vestiges of religion that remain among the Muslims of the country today are a result of the dedicated work of these institutions. It is these signs of religious commitment that have become an eye-sore to Westernised, anti-religious forces. Madrasas need to carry on in this wise path of our elders and continue with the task, mandated by God and the Prophet, of demonstrating and witnessing to the Truth. For this, they must keep themselves in harmony with the changing needs and conditions of the times. They must seek to answer the new problems that the new times produce and to effectively face new challenges. When madrasa students step out of their institutions, which are sealed off from the outside world, they should not feel out of place and be led to think that they had spent much of their lives closed in a fortress that has nothing to do with the rest of the world. Rather, they should be in a position to guide society on the lines of the Faith, for today materialism and atheism are rife, and knowledge is framed and used in such a way as to take people away, rather than towards, God. Madrasas must provide their students with knowledge of contemporary developments so as to enable them to understand the objections against and criticisms of Islam and to effectively respond to them. Further, they must also train and inspire their students to effectively communicate the truths of Islam to others.

In advocating that madrasas be able to respond to modern challenges and suitably relate to contemporary demands I am certainly not arguing, as do some self-styled ‘progressives’, that Islam should be moulded according to the times, rather than the other way round, and that it be interpreted in the way the West wants it to be. It is absolutely erroneous to imagine that since the times and conditions have changed and so have many social and economic aspects of life, the Islam based on the 1400 year-old tradition of the Quran and Sunnah needs to be revised. It certainly does not mean that when we call for an Islamic Renaissance, for a new religious interpretation and for reforming madrasa education by taking into account the demands of the present age we are suggesting that Islam should be modified according to our own whims. Islam is the religion of nature and in its laws and commandments it has taken into account human nature. This, indeed, is the actual soul of Islamic law and the basis of Islam’s teachings. All the revolutions that the world has witnessed have had to do simply with external means and causes, while human nature and its basic demands and human feelings and emotions have remained the same and will always do so.


The Madrasa System of Education: Aspects in Need of Change and the Limits of Change

There is no doubt that the basic aims and objectives of madrasas have always been the same in the past, and shall remain so in the future, too. If Islam is an eternal religion and a guide for humanity till the Day of Judgment—as it indeed is—then the basic aim of the madrasas—that the path that God and the Prophet have prescribed for humanity, and which is the way to success, be taught and made known—cannot be altered. However, this certainly does not mean that the entire system and structure of madrasa education is beyond change, as if these are meant simply to serve as relics from the past, an archaeological curiosity for an age that has vastly changed. Study the history of the ulema, the renewers of the faith, the guides to the path, the history of people like Imam Malik and Ibn Shihab Zahri and down to Shah Waliullah, Maulana Muhammad Qasim Nanotawi, Maulana Muhammad Ali Mungeri etc.. You will discover that the real spirit running through their work and their writings was the same—the protection of the Faith and its propagation and revival in the light of contemporary thought. But yet, for this same purpose the methods that these leaders used differed from each other, each suited to their own age and context.

In this regard, then, we must examine our madrasa education system and allow for necessary changes. In addition, we must also recognise that the general level of the graduates that the madrasas are today churning out is, unfortunately, not very satisfactory, and that their contribution and benefit to society is limited, and, indeed, quite disheartening. Certain aspects of the present system of madrasa education are in need of reform in order to make it more effective and more in accordance with contemporary demands. In this respect one can point to such troubling issues as stagnation in the syllabus, excessive attention being paid to certain subjects and the corresponding lack of adequate attention to certain modern subjects, the focus on mastery of certain specified books rather than certain disciplines, shortcomings in teaching methods, the absence of teaching important languages and the lack of co-ordination and co-operation between various madrasas.

Stagnation in the Madrasas Curriculum:

When I say that the madrasa curriculum has stagnated, I certainly do not mean to argue that all the books that are presently taught in madrasas should be discarded or that they are unable to provide proper religious and intellectual guidance and understanding or that teaching them is wholly useless. Not at all. But, yet, it is an undeniable fact that from the point of view of what the aims and objectives of a proper madrasa syllabus should be, the majority of texts currently used in the madrasas deserve to be re-looked at. Many of them can be removed from the list of prescribed books that are part of the syllabus and, instead, be made for the students to read on their own.

In order to counter the powerful waves of materialism and atheism flooding in from the West and the accompanying criticisms of Islam’s system and way of life, madrasas ought to have included the causes or the basic purposes of Islamic rules or what are called the ‘secrets of the shariah’ (asrar-e shariah) as a separate subject in their curriculum. For this purpose, madrasas could have used Shah Waliullah’s well-known book Hujjat Ullah al-Balagha, and sections of some books by Imam Ibn Qayyim and Imam Ghazali and so on. However, because the dars-i nizami syllabus as formulated by Mulla Nizamuddin Sihalawi, which is still used by most Indian madrasas, did not give any importance to this subject, it was neglected in most Indian madrasas. Recently, some madrasas have included this subject in their syllabus but even in these institutions it does not get the importance that it deserves.

Today, as a result of new inventions as well as a product of the present global socio-political system, new legal issues have emerged. It is necessary for Islamic law to address these issues. For this purpose, Islamic scholars require a deep understanding of the sources, principles and methods of reasoning of Islamic jurisprudence. Madrasas must give greater stress to these than at present. Unfortunately, only two or three books on the principles of Islamic jurisprudence are included in the present madrasa syllabus. And even these have their limitations, being, for the most part, limited just to the Quran as a source of jurisprudence, and not dealing with other sources of Islamic jurisprudence, such as the Sunnah or practice of the Prophet, ijma or the consensus of the scholars and qiyas or analogy. Several suitable books for these are available and they should be included in the curriculum. Furthermore, madrasa students should also be familiarized with texts on the principles of jurisprudence written by scholars belonging to schools of Islamic jurisprudence other than their own.

Likewise, the present madrasa curriculum does not do justice to such subjects as the principles of Hadith and the principles of Quranic commentary. In some madrasas, no books on these subjects are taught at all or else some small booklets are used, and that too in a very cursory manner. Further, it would not be wrong to say that madrasas have not given the Quran its due. Generally, in our madrasas only two Quranic commentaries are taught: the Tafsir-e Baidhawi and Jalalayn. The former is clearly insufficient for expressing the actual spirit of the Quran, and it only entangles the reader in verbal puzzles. Further, it does not deal with the entire Quran, being restricted just till the Surah al-Baqarah. As for the Jalalayn, it is like a rendering of the Quran in a different form of Arabic. So, this is all that is taught in the madrasas about the Quran, although there are numerous books dealing with the meaning of and commentaries on the Quran that can be incorporated in the curriculum.

Madrasas give no importance at all to the teaching of history and to the books abut the life of the Prophet, although this was once a major area of specialization of the ulema. It is a subject that can never lose its relevance and importance. One of the reasons why much of the fiercely anti-Islamic propaganda coming out of the West has gone uncontested is because the ulema have ignored and are ignorant of the history of Islam, and so cannot counter the wrong allegations being made about it. Leave alone the history of non-Muslims or of recent global developments, about which they know almost nothing, madrasa students have an extremely superficial knowledge of even the early history of Islam and the Muslims. It is absolutely necessary that books on the history of Islam, of India and of the world be included in the madrasa curriculum.

Today, subjects need to be studied in depth and from their original sources. Critics of Islam have established specialized Islamic research centres, and they have a deep knowledge of our history, our beliefs, our theology and our laws, which they use to seek to distort the image of Islam. Islamic scholars should also study other religions, and for this, certain books can be included in the madrasa curriculum that provide an introduction to the various religions, their basic beliefs, their social and economic principles and the lives of their leaders, drawing upon their original and reliable texts and sources. Further, madrasa students must also be made aware of modern social and economic systems and philosophies and theories. They must have at least a basic idea of the thought of such key modern thinkers as Karl Marx, Lenin, Freud, Darwin and so on. While studying Islamic jurisprudence, they must be familiarised with the position of modern international law on key issues in a comparative perspective. Without this, modern challenges cannot be effectively answered and met.

Finally, it should be remembered that all these suggested measures of reform in the madrasas can be successful only if what are regarded as the ‘mothers of the madrasas’ (umm ul-madaris)—the larger ones that have spawned many others that follow their system—take the initiative first.
=======================================================

*This is an abridged translation of an article by the author titled Dini Madaris Ka Nisab-o-Nizam Aur Jadid Taqaze, which appeared in the January 2003 issue of the New Delhi-based Urdu monthly Tarjuman Dar ul-Ulum (vol. 10, no.8, p.23-32)

Democracy In the Middle East

Dear Ibrahim,

Hi, I am Wazhma Frogh, working in Afghanistan. I am studying social sciences/anthropology at the American University of Afghanistan... i read your article and really support most of your ideas in terms of democracy... but at the end of the day democracy too is a political discourse that has been created for a certain purpose of a certain group maybe... the main thing is how humanity is saved midst of all chaos and me being and living in a namely democractic country while nothing is actually democratic and sometimes i think it cant be this way.....

Wazhma

Ibrahim Uyar wrote:

Democracy in Middle East
Ibrahim Uyar
Political Science Student

Today, there are 22 Arab countries in the world, and yet the number of those countries with substantially and democratically elected governments is sadly zero. All of these countries are governed with various systems with democratic elements, but not one of them could be classified as a democracy. Some of these systems have formed authoritarian structures under the strict rule of a cult-like party leader, a monarchal leader, or an emir.
Historically, one of the main obstacles in democratization lies in lingering sentiments toward colonialism in the Arab world by Britain, France and Italy. During the time of colonialism, the majority of Arabs were seeking social justice, social unity, and ways to repel Western oppression. Most of Arab-Muslim intellectuals opted to completely refuse the West, and they looked to alternative institutions that are regrettably authoritarian in character. Another historically-rooted obstacle in the democratization process is the impact on the Arab world of the Iranian Revolution, which was to many an inspiring reference of success for Islamic movements.
The most powerful obstacle impeding peace efforts and democratization in the Middle East, however, is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its repercussions in the rest of the world, Arab and non-Arab alike. Without solving this problem, peace and democracy are nearly impossible. In this conflict, there are many problems that need to be addressed:
• The occupied territories and the many ramifications that accompany them.
• Jerusalem and its future as a capital for either or both sides.
• Refugees’ rights and the right to return.
• Borders that must be fair and respectful to both sides.
• The future statehood – binational or two-state.

In addition to the inherent problems in the conflict, tensions are fueled by America’s unfair foreign policy and treatment of the Middle East. If peace and democracy are truly desired in the Middle East and the rest of the world, America ought to dedicate itself modifying its approach to provide a more balanced position. It is almost impossible to think of a peaceful and democratic Middle East without first solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and America has the potential to help immensely to that end. With current Middle East policy, America’s hegemonic and potentially-imperial ambitions are alienating a great deal of credibility among Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians in the world. This conflict simply allows authoritarian regimes to maintain their security and restrict freedom in the name of national security. Regrettably, secular parties then lose their legitimacy or become gatekeepers of authoritarian regimes in part due to American support of corrupted and despotic Arab regimes.
America should start reforming its policies toward the Saudi Arabian monarchy, and from there work toward Egypt ending its military dictatorship before it is too late. Authoritarian regimes are huge obstructions to attempts at democracy. The first step is removing the dictator in order to permit a more lawful and inherently more democratic society. America must use nonmilitary approaches, such as diplomatic pressure, foreign aid, expansion of international radio and television supply, and immediate assistance to indigenous pro-democracy elements. Additionally, it would be a mistake to prohibit Islamist parties on the assumption that they are fundamentally undemocratic or subject to violence. The best way to marginalize violent radicals is to create room for as extensive a range of nonviolent viewpoint as possible. At the same time, emphasis should be placed on strengthening representation of minorities’ rights.
Western democracies should be kind and fair in sharing their knowledge of such areas as improving education, fighting corruption and promoting investment. Democracy will definitely come to the Arab world and replace old fashion political system, but the above-mentioned actions must be taken immediately. It is also worth mentioning since the Arab and Muslim world is so intertwined that Islam is a religion that contains moral principles, which cannot be changed; democracy on the other hand is a political ideology that can be adapted and applied into a Muslim government without arguing and criticizing Islam’s moral principles. If other democracies are to be borne in the Middle East, America must first take steps toward solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and in a way that incorporates rather than alienates all elements of society, even those who espouse Islamic beliefs and support an Islamic-based government.
Democracies like any form of government have both pros and cons that come along with it. The form of democracy that is trying to be installed in the West Bank and Gaza strip is particularly problematic. The dilemma facing democracy for the Palestinian people is legitimacy. The main opposition to democracy, an Islamic State, gains legitimacy much easier. An Islamic State gains its legitimacy from the Islamic faith; promising equality, justice, social welfare, and order. A democracy gains legitimacy from both the people it governs and from other nations. Palestinian democracy is failing in both these categories.
The Palestinian people do not have faith in their governing body to lead effectively and, this can best be seen in the recent elections, in which the fundamentalist group Hamas won 74 of 132 parliamentary seats. According to President Jimmy Carter, who was present for the elections, exit polling showed that only 1% of the people supported instituting Islamic Law, and 73% supported a two-state solution with Israel (Carter pg. 185). The vote for Hamas contradicts Hamas’s goals as an organization; a fundamentalist group like Hamas cannot accept the existence of Israel, and wishes for Islamic Law. But because the Palestinian people did not have faith in the Fatah lead Palestinian Authority they have moved to the polar opposite.
Democracies are only liable to their people, not foreign powers. In this sense Western and Israeli actions undermine Palestinian democracy greatly. Israeli control over the economy and Palestinian budget display foreign influence on what should be controlled by a complete democracy. In 2005 $849 million of the Palestinian $2.15 billion budget came from Israel; this is the payment of taxes collected by the Israelis on behalf of the Palestinian Authority. With Hamas’s election the Israelis have withheld this money as a form of collective punishment (Brown pg. 6). Here lies another problem with this democracy, in any true democracy the people’s options can not be limited. The election of a group that would like to abolish the system that gives them power, like Hamas, is a threat to the democratic system. But, a democracy cannot act in an authoritarian manner, and dissolve a parliament, or change election days due to the election of an unwanted party.
Israeli control over Palestinian movement, resources, and security all take legitimacy away from the Palestinian Authority. Israel also controls the Palestinian market place, as President Abbas explained to President Carter.
“Israel had taken more control of the consumer and production sectors of the area’s [West Bank] economy, making it an exclusive market for many Israeli products even among the local Palestinian citizen, who could not sell their own products in Israel, Jordan, or other Places (Carter pg. 183).”

Governing bodies must have complete sovereignty, the ability to control an economy, borders, and taxation cannot be controlled by external forces; the democracy that is being installed in Palestine is setup for failure, because it is undermined by external forces.
The ability for democracy and the Islamic religion to coexist is an issue for many; fundamentalists believe it is impossible for democracy and Islam to coexist. Fundamentalists view Islam as all encompassing, and because Islam is derived from God it is perfect, unlike the easy corruptible and imperfect laws of man. Muqtedar Khan, Director of international studies at Adrian College in Michigan, believes that Islam and democracy are not totally incompatible. He looks to the Quran for his evidence and says,
“While sovereignty belongs to God, it has been delegated in the form of human agency (Quran 2:30). The political task is to reflect on how this God-given agency can be best employed in creating a society that will bring welfare and goodness to the population ... God is sovereign in all affairs, but God has exercised sovereignty by delegating some of it in the form of human agency. God cannot become an excuse for installing and legitimizing governments that are not accountable to their citizens and responsive to their needs (USIP, pg. 5).”

Khan’s does not believe that Islam and democracy are one in the same, but does not want people to believe that the two are as incompatible as fundamentalists would have people believe. Another example of unity between democracy and Islam can be found in the compact of Medina, referred to by some scholars as Dustur al-Madina (the Constitution of Medina). When the Profit Muhammad created his Islamic state he ruled as the political head, because of a compact that was signed by Muslims from Mecca and Medina; and Jews of Medina. Khan points out that this compact is not a modern constitution but can be viewed as a “guiding principle (USIP, pg. 5).” A true democracy would give power to the Palestinian people; but the form exported to the region is inefficient, lacks of legitimacy, and is viewed as an opposition to the Islamic faith.
As it is in the best interests of the world community, more powerful nations have played very significant roles in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the subsequent peace efforts. Since 1973, America has given about $1.6 trillion dollars to Israel in terms of economic and military support meanwhile economic support for Palestine has averaged around $55 million dollars a year. Despite accusations of human rights violations, America currently gives Israel $3 billion dollars a year in military aid, a sharp contrast with the $0 dollars given to the Palestinian Authority for military aid (Miller, pg. 132). Current President George W. Bush has not detoured from the road that past Presidents have followed in the support of Israel. The current government has advocated democracy in the Middle East, particularly in this region. In January 2005, upon President Abbas election as President of the Palestinian National Authority, President Bush lauded the democratic efforts of Palestine (he previously denounced Yasser Arafat). In 2002, President Bush announced a plan for peace in the Israeli-Palestinian called “The Road Map” which, as of this date, has yet to bear any results.
The European Union as a whole seems to differ with the United States in terms of supporting a peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The European Union tends to view Israel as an occupying state in the West Bank and Gaza strip, therefore making it responsible for the political and social human rights violations (Bassam Al-Salhi, pg. 15). The European Union is seen as the leader of financial aid to Palestine giving over $400 million to rebuild Palestine internally (Asmus, pg. 52). The EU supports peace and democracy in the region, but calls on more of an effort from Israel to ensure peace and democracy in the region in addition to President Bush’s “Road Map.”
The United Nations has been criticized by many of the Zionist movement for focusing too much on Human rights. In 2007, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination called on Israel to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their property and land in Israel and to ensure that the bodies responsible for distributing property, such as the Jewish National Fund, not discriminate against the Arab population (Dershowitz, pg. 71). The UN Security Council has made many attempts to halt Israeli military operations in certain areas (such as Gaza). One resolution halting such actions condemned “the military operations being carried out by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Gaza Strip, in particular the attack that took place in Beit Hanoun on 8 November 2006, which have caused loss of civilian life and extensive destruction of Palestinian property and vital infrastructure (Dershowitz, pg. 72).” The United States, a powerful member of the Security Council, vetoed this resolution.
There are three key issues of the major powers that are delaying the peace process in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. One of the key problems is the United States role in the peace process between Israel and Palestine and its inability to display diplomatic strength (Kurtzer, pg. 41). Similarly to the peace efforts made at Camp David by President Bill Clinton, President Bush’s “Road Map” came to an abrupt dead end when Hamas was elected into the Palestinian government. Instead of discontinuing the effort, The United States must pursue the process of peace by holding both Palestine and Israel equally accountable for any breaches of peaceful efforts. The United States seems too quick to denounce the actions of Palestine, while never quite fully holding Israel accountable for its actions.
The second key issue is the lack of uniformity. The European Union along with the United Nations differ from the United States in their ideologies to the handling of the situation between Israel and Palestine. One criticism from the EU towards the US is that the US has been too biased in regards to peace between Israel and Palestine (Bassam Al-Salhi, pg. 15). The idea of a possible induction of Israel into the EU to curb its policies and help persuade the United States to take more action seems to be becoming more of a viable option. Greater disparity between the major powers positions on the issue will not aid the progress of peace talks between Israel and Palestine. In order for there to be peace between Palestine and Israel, these major powers must come to a consensus on handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Finally, the third issue is the ongoing violence between Israel and Palestine which has stalled peace and democratic efforts. Democracy can be effective in Palestine, but in order for it to be effective there must be an attempt to create peace between these two territories. It is not the flaws of democracy that lead to the problems in Palestine, but the inability of the government to be effective. Democracies represent the needs of the people, but in the case of Palestine, the people’s frustration with the government’s lack of action in dealing with the Israeli occupation has fostered violent behavior. The major necessity of the Palestinian people, which is to have a solution to the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, can only be attained through a resolution of the Palestinian and Israeli conflict.
Even with help from the West, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict contains many important aspects that must be addressed in order to attain the most democratic and peaceful results. Perhaps the most pressing of these problems – as without this, none of the other problems can be fully addressed – is the question of whether a unified binational state should emerge in Palestine, or if Israel should remain a Jewish state and a state of Palestine should emerge separately.
If democracy is to endure in the land of Palestine, all aspects of the peace process must be addressed in a democratic manner. Thus, it is important to strive for the solution that most Palestinians and Israelis support. In a March 2007 poll of roughly 1,200 Palestinians (in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip), 46.7 percent preferred the idea of a two-state solution to that of a binational one. Only 26.5 preferred a binational state on all of historic Palestine, and the rest preferred other solutions by smaller margins. The idea of a binational state is in some ways more democratic than a two-state solution, primarily in that it would encourage unity and bargaining between Israelis and Palestinians since they would have to work together to maintain a government. However, it has always been the less popular of the two main options. The strongest opposition to the idea of a binational state comes from Israelis who realize in a single-state solution, they would no longer live in a “Jewish state.” They would be living in a combined Arab-Jewish state, and if population trends continue at current rates, Palestinians will already outnumber Jews in Israel and the occupied territories by roughly 2020, even if a solution is not attained. In that scenario, the Israeli government would be forced to decide if it would maintain its status as a Jewish state – and in so doing, basically become an apartheid state – or if it would accept a future as a non-Jewish state – and in so doing, become a fully democratic state. Thus, the idea of a two-state solution is more appealing to Israelis just as much as it is to Palestinians.
Since the two-state solution is popular with quite a mandate among both sides, and is in the best interests of all parties involved, the other details of peace are able to be negotiated later. Additionally, they can be negotiated in a democratic fashion by America acting as a third party negotiator and affording equal and fair treatment to both sides. If representatives from both sides of the conflict can be brought together and can agree on the idea of a two-state solution, the rest of the issues (refugees, borders, Jerusalem, etc.) can be discussed and solved in a mutually agreeable fashion.
Regardless of the long-term solution to the conflict, whether one-state or two-state, democracy will serve as an integral part of its success. In a one-state solution, democracy would be evident in the equal cooperation and incorporation of both Israelis and Palestinians into the governmental process. In a two-state solution, the State of Israel and the State of Palestine would become interdependent on one another in pursuing a lasting and prosperous peace. For much of history, democracies have demonstrated that there are peaceful and diplomatic ways to reconcile difference without resorting to violence and warfare. The overwhelming support on both sides for an amicable two-state solution to the conflict demonstrates that there is a willingness in the land of Palestine to strive toward a just and peaceful democracy. Furthermore, the successful solving of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would serve as a model for the rest of the Middle East and is the best possible chance of achieving peace and democracy in the rest of the area and even the rest of the world. The attainment of peace is part of the necessary groundwork for functioning democracies, and the democratic elements in both Israeli and Palestinian societies will in turn help foster stability and civil society.

________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

Islamo-Fascism

Actually, it appears that Martin Kramer is "senior Middle East advisor to the Giuliani campaign."JonOn Wed, Sep 12, 2007 04:05 PM, Mohammad Fadel wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
Gabriele,

Your post is excellent. I am coming to believe, unfortunately, that this is an extremely dangerous movement. Rudy Giulani, who may very well be the next President of the United States, has Horowitz as his national security adviser, and uses the term frequently. My suspicion is that his entire campaign will be about “Islamofascism.” Of course, Rudy himself displays many of the characteristics of the fascism you described in your post. We can only watch and pray.

Mohammad Fadel
Assistant Professor of Law
University of Toronto Faculty of Law
78 Queen's Park
Toronto, Ontario M5S 2C5
Canada

(416) 946-0589 (office)
(416) 978-7899 (fax)
From: Section for the study of Islam, American Academy of Religion [mailto:ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Dr. G. MarranciSent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 2:58 PMTo: ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDUSubject: Re: [ISLAMAAR] David Horowitz "Declares" Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week on Campus

Dear all,I have tried to engage with a comment on my personal blog http://marranci.wordpress.com/ with Horowitz&Co. after three days they have not answered, commented or even tried to reply my questions. Coming from a family who lived Fascism from both the side (as oppressed and oppressors, see the post for more) I think that I needed to explain in a clear way my total opposition to the term Islamo-Fascism itself Ramadan Mubarak to all Gabriele
On 10/09/2007, James S. Pasto <jpasto@bu.edu > wrote:
This defination makes it worse in my view: it is too abstract, too broad, too personified. It sounds like "the Jews" or "Islam" or "the Orient" in other contexts, and, like these, it has shades of collective guilt and demonization. On top of it, you apply it selectively; but in the terms of the your descriptions we could also say that "the West" exploited European immigrant wage workers and busted miners unions in 1920s Virgina; "the West" put Italians and Italian Americans (yes, and some Germans) in concentration camps during WWII; "the West" colonized the Irish, shipped them to the United States, conscripted them into civil war, put them in eastern slumes, and then burned down their churches. Dosen't this sound ridiculous; it does to me. Where does "the West" end and the other demons start? Mind you: I don't defend any of the negative events you pointed out. I just don't think "the West" did them. Same goes for the positive things.
Let's try to think of another way of thinking and talking about these things.
I'm not part of any West; I'm from Southern Italy (smile).
Pace,
James
Quoting Tugrul Keskin <tugrulk@VT.EDU>:> The argument about about Horowitz in reverse is an interesting one. However,> I should have been more clear regarding exactly what I meant by "the West."> My thoughts on the West are as follows:>> 'The West' to me is the broad entity that is responsible for occupying> Vietnam. In this context, the West killed 2 million Vietnamese and> permanently wounded more than 300,000 others with 30 per cent disability. At> the same time, there were half a million defective births as a result of> Agent Orange gas and another 3 million innocent people victims of Agent> Orange. 58,000 Americans died and 75,000 were severely disabled.>> The West is responsible for occupying Iraq a century ago in order to protect> Western interests, thus, creating this mess we have today in the Middle> East. The West supported the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein against> Iran, resulting in 500.000 deaths. The West also has produced 80% of the> world's total land mines (Austria, China, France, Germany, Italy, the former> Soviet Union, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States) and many> millions of people have been killed or disabled, from Afghanistan to Africa.>> The West occupied Iraq in 2002 in order to install a so-called> democracy, like British did at the beginning of 20th century. But the real> meaning behind the occupation was not democracy, it was exploitation and> Colonialization. As a result of the occupation, according to Britain's most> respected medical journal, The Lancet in October 2006, 654,965 Iraqi> citizens had been killed (at least 392,979 and as many as 942,636). In June> 2007, these numbers totaled 785,957 Iraqi civilian deaths and 1,414,723> serious injuries.>> The West is responsible for failing to help the poor of New Orleans in the> aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Many poor people of New Orleans have sine> moved to Texas and have been staying in shelters following the disaster.>> The West is responsible for not helping the Rwandan people and the result> was more than half a million deaths. This is because the Rwandans did not> have oil and also because they are blacks. The West also supported the> South African apartheid regime for 30 years, and has supported Light Islam -> Ilimli Islam (a Green belt project by the CIA) against the Soviets in order> to create an Islamic resistance against atheist and anti-capitalist regimes.> The result has been the creation of its own enemy such as Dr. Jekyll and> Frankenstein; also similar to Al-Qaida and Osama Bin Laden. This was an> unintended consequences of Western imperialism.>> The West is responsible for killing 6 million Jews and 600.000 gypsies under> the Third Reich. The West put Japanese-Americans into reservation camps> during WWII; on the other hand why they did not put German-Americans into> camps, perhaps because of race?>> The West is also responsible for having killed the democratically elected> Chilean President, Salvador Allende, in addition to overthrowing the> Mussadiq Regime in Iran and installing a puppet, the Shah; as is the case in> Iraq and Afghanistan today.>> The definition of the West can go on longer than you can imagine. The West> as I have tried to define it here is not a geographical location, but it is> rather an ideology or mentality of racism, imperialism and colonialism. This> can be in the East or in the West. To me, there is no difference between> people who are suffering under the occupation of Iraq and people in New> Orleans who have suffered from poverty and exclusion.>> I think the West is the empire as Negri defines it, or what Neil Smith> refers to as the American Empire or it may be Saddam Regime in the east or> Pol Pot in Cambodia.>> On the other hand, there is another West that is known to promote equality,> modernity, human rights and to do so without Orientalist and Imperialistic> interests. The West in this case is an entity to be admired, whom I enjoy> learning from; such as the Frankfurt school, the American Civil Liberty> Union, or such figureheads as Amy Goodman from www.democracynow.org or> Amnesty International, or Howard Zinn, Norman Finkelstein or Ward Churchill> or Marx or Hannah Arendt or Weber. The list goes on.>> Is this Horowitz in reverse? I don't think so. The mirror reflects the image> itself. I also consider myself as a Western-oriented person, but oriented> towards the ideal of the West not the West as it is in practice, as I have> tried to explain above.>> With peace, but not the Western-imposed peace on the Japanese at the end of> WW II.>> Which West do you consider yourselves to be a part of?>>> Best to all,>> tugrul>>>>>>> On 9/9/07 8:54 AM, "James Pasto" <jpasto@BU.EDU> wrote:>>> Dear Vernon,>>>> My post was general with respect to the post from Tugral Keshkin. Two quotes>> caught my attention:>>>> "Imperialism, Colonialism, Orientalism and the exclusion of others has been>> hidden within the culture of racism in the West.">>>> And (especially)>>>> "The new enemy is Islam and the next one might be China unless, racism as>> an ideology created in the West diminishes from people's minds and tolerance>> starts to flourish in its absence">>>> There was also the list of selective, exclusive Others - "niggers...dirty>> Mexicans...uncivilized Africans...and greedy Chinese," which are claimed to>> be equivalent to calling someone an "Islamofacist.">>>> I referred to this as essentializing and labeling. It recreates the colonial>> boundaries it claims to refute. It doesn't' change the subject with>> Horowitz; the subject was, for me, Horowitz in reverse.>>>> Peace,>>>> James>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----->> From: Section for the study of Islam, American Academy of Religion>> [mailto:ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Vernon Schubel>> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 5:10 PM>> To: ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU>> Subject: Re: [ISLAMAAR] David Horowitz "Declares" Islamo-Fascism Awareness>> Week on Campus>>>> Dear Prof. Pasto:>>>> To whom is your post directed. I didn't hear anyone in this thread>> deny that only the West could be hegemonic. Intolerance is unfortunately>> everywhere. It is interesting to note that only "the West" came up with>> plantation slavery based on skin color. But intolerance has been>> everywhere at some point and to some degree. I don't see how that>> changes the subject from Horowitz.>>>> Selamlar,>>>> Vernon>>>>>>>> James Pasto wrote:>>> I have to be honest, here; it irks me when in rejecting (rightly)>>> Islamofacist and other essentializing practices, you fall right into more>>> essentializing and labeling.>>>>>> So, it is only in "the West," that labeling occurs or occurred? So is it>>> only these selected "Others" who are labeled? What about "Dagos" and>>> "Micks?" The Spanish Empire included southern Italy. The British Empire>>> included Ireland (and still does according to some people). The slave>> trade>>> went both ways. Did Hindus and Muslims never labeled conquered-others?>> Were>>> Ancient Egyptians and Assyrians "westerners" then?>>>>>> Are you really putting forth the idea that racism and intolerance are>>> products of "the West?">>>>>> This sounds like David Horowitz in reverse? And I thought he was "the>>> reverser.">>>>>> How on earth do we get out of this thinking the thinking is just like>> this?>>>>>> Peace,>>>>>> Jim Pasto>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----->>> From: Section for the study of Islam, American Academy of Religion>>> [mailto:ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Vernon Schubel>>> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 11:00 PM>>> To: ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU>>> Subject: Re: [ISLAMAAR] David Horowitz "Declares" Islamo-Fascism Awareness>>> Week on Campus>>>>>> Friends,>>>>>> Mea Culpa. I thought I was sending this to the Sociology of Islam list>>> because>>> I saw Prof. Keskin's name. Sorry to have repeated some of my earlier>>> statements>>> on the AAR list.>>>>>> Selamlar again,>>>>>> Vernon>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Tugrul Keskin <tugrulk@VT.EDU>:>>>>>>>>>> First of all, the idea of 'Islamofascism' or the labeling of others is>> not>>>>>>> a>>>>>>> New phenomenon to the West. Imperialism, Colonialism, Orientalism and the>>>> exclusion of others has been hidden within the culture of racism in the>>>> West.>>>>>>>> For example, 'nigger' is a term that is not a different than calling>>>> others 'Islamofascist.' The definition of this word may be equated>>>> with nigger, or the 'macaca nation' (remember George Allen's comment>>>> regarding>>>> the Macaca nation), also similar to 'dirty Mexican,' or 'uncivilized>>>> Africans,'>>>> 'greedy Chinese' and a long list of others as a product of imperialist>> and>>>> racist thought.>>>>>>>> Secondly, lately in the US, some scholars are using the terms Liberal and>>>> Fundamentalist Islam to differentiate between 'good Islam' and 'bad>> Islam'>>>> -in order to define the interest of imperialism.>>>>>>>> Actually, to me it is more accurate to remove the first two words from>>>>>>> this>>>>>>> orientalistic (re-)definition and use only the word Islam. The text of>> the>>>> religion is the same in all cases, it is not different from in the>> Sahaba,>>>> Andulus or Ottoman period.>>>>>>>> Therefore, I do not think it is good idea to identify Islam as liberal or>>>> fundamentalist, these terms apply only to people, not to the religion>>>> itself.>>>> We may use progressive Muslims, not progressive Islam. Islam is what it>>>>>>> is.>>>>>>> Whether Islam is fundamentalist (bad Islam) or liberal (good Islam),>> Islam>>>> is>>>> a threat to Imperialism, because imperialism is based on the idea>>>> of the creating enemy in order to survive and exploit the people (like in>>>> Iraq today).>>>> The new enemy is Islam and the next one might be China unless, racism as>>>>>>> an>>>>>>> ideology>>>> created in the West diminishes from people's minds and tolerance starts>> to>>>> flourish>>>> in its absence. However, after listening to presidential candidate>>>>>>> Tancredo,>>>>>>> I am a>>>> little pessimistic about this artificial flourishing.>>>>>>>> I think we should all begin to celebrate the Islamofascism Awareness Week>>>>>>> at>>>>>>> the DePaul University where the tenure of Norman Finkelstein was denied.>>>>>>>> tugrul>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -->>>> Tugrul Keskin>>>>>>>> Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University>>>> Department of Sociology>>>> 560 McBryde Hall>>>> Blacksburg, VA 24061 - USA>>>> Cell:202-378-8606>>>> http://www.vt.edu>>>>>>>> " You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality.>>>> Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.">>>>>>>> Malcolm X>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/6/07 10:56 AM, "Daniel Martin Varisco">> <Daniel.M.Varisco@HOFSTRA.EDU>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mohammed,>>>>> Thank you for this eloquent rejoinder. The problem we face as>>>>>>>>> scholars>>>>>>>>> and or practitioners who know something about the historical and>>>>>>>>> contemporary>>>>>>>>> diversity of a religion-made-into-a-culture called "Islam" is that our>>>>>>>>> efforts>>>>>>>>> at showing nuance are anathema to those with an ideological agenda that>>>>>>>>> blinds>>>>>>>>> them to the dangers of their own fear-mongering. In my quite>>>>>>>> intentionally>>>>>>>> sarcastic Tabsir ( http://tabsir.net/?p=305) retort to the ludicrous>>>>>>>>> Horowitz>>>>>>>>> campus blitz to discredit Islam by reducing it to a form of fascism, I>>>>>>>>> became>>>>>>>>> the recipient of a flurry (at least for the blog) of negative comments>>>>>>>> from>>>>>>>> Spencer and Horowitz supporters who automatically equated criticism of a>>>>> loaded term like "Islamofascism" with either a defense of terrorist acts>>>>>>>> or>>>>>>> a>>>>>>>>> naivete that encourages a supposed global enemy. It is interesting>>>>>>>> (not>>>>>>> in a>>>>>>>>> very positive sense) to look at some of the comments to the post for>>>>>>>> their>>>>>>>> failure to distinguish between actions done by a few politically>>>>>>>> motivated>>>>>>>> individuals in the name of a religion (9/11 for example) and what the>>>>>>>> vast>>>>>>>> majority of Muslims believe and do, not to mention the widespread>>>>>>>>> condemnation>>>>>>>>> of such acts by Muslims. Fascism is fascism. There is nothing inherent>>>>>>>> in>>>>>>>> Islam that breeds terrorism any more than there has been in the>>>>>>>> progressive>>>>>>>> evolution of Judaism or Christianity or Hinduism or secularism. The St.>>>>> Bartholomew's Day massacre is hardly the essence of Catholic>>>>>>>> Christianity,>>>>>>> nor>>>>>>>>> for that matter the political motivations in the Crusades. And>>>>>>>> certainly>>>>>>>> oppression of women, a fundamental concern of every Women's Studies>>>>>>>> Program>>>>>>> I>>>>>>>>> know, is not confined to any specific culture or religion. Ideologues>>>>>>>> who>>>>>>>> live in societies with glass ceilings should not throw stones... Abuse>>>>>>>> is>>>>>>>> abuse, no matter how it is justified. Violence is violence, no matter>>>>>>>> how>>>>>>> it>>>>>>>>> is spun in anger and frustration and revenge. I categorically condemn>>>>>>>> it,>>>>>>> as>>>>>>>>> I suspect does just about everyone else on this list. This is an>>>>>>>> important>>>>>>>> issue, since Horowitz, Pipes and their allies seek to discredit scholars>>>>>>>>> who>>>>>>>>> do not share their agenda of hate and misinformation. So I invite>>>>>>>>> colleagues>>>>>>>>> to post their thoughts on all this somewhere (the blog Tabsir is open to>>>>>>>>> all>>>>>>>>> who have something informative to say).>>>>>>>>>> Dan>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Martin Varisco>>>>> Chair and Professor Anthropology>>>>> Hofstra University>>>>> Hempstead, NY 11549>>>>> Daniel.M.Varisco@hofstra.edu>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Mohammad Fadel wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for forwarding this. The statement, however, does not seem>>>>>>>>> to>>>>>>> get>>>>>>>>>> us very far. How is one to distinguish between a ³believing² Muslim>>>>>>>>> and a>>>>>>>>> ³fundamentalist² Muslim when many accuse observant Muslims ­ because of>>>>>>>>>> their>>>>>>>>>> observance of historically orthodox Islamic norms ­ of being>>>>>> ³fundamentalists.² It is my general impression (although I am happy to>>>>>>>>> be>>>>>>>>> corrected) that Women Living under Muslim Laws falls into the same>>>>>>>>>> category>>>>>>>>>> of those who claim to distinguish between ³believing² Muslims and>>>>>> ³fundamentalists,² but in fact end up making no such distinction in>>>>>>>>>> practice>>>>>>>>>> other than to imply that outward manifestations of Islam, e.g. wearing>>>>>>>>> a>>>>>>>>> head-scarf in the case of woman, growing a beard in the case of a man,>>>>>>>>> or>>>>>>>>> observing daily prayers, especially in a mosque, are prima facie>>>>>>>>> evidence>>>>>>> of>>>>>>>>>> fundamentalism, and therefore can be legitimately repressed. Moreover,>>>>>> accepting the political rights of religiously-based groups within a>>>>>> constitutional framework does not constitute ³support² or ³endorsement²>>>>>>>>> of>>>>>>>>> that group¹s political agenda, merely recognition of their political>>>>>> membership in that society. That is surely what WIB meant when it>>>>>> recognized Hamas as the legitimate victor in Palestinian elections.>>>>>> Presumably, in any society in which ordinary ³believing² Muslims>>>>>>>>> exist,>>>>>>> one>>>>>>>>>> would expect that the expectations of such citizens would influence>>>>>>>>>> political>>>>>>>>>> outcomes. Yet, this statement seems to posit the existence of good>>>>>> ³believing² Muslims whose convictions are politically irrelevant and>>>>>>>>> evil>>>>>>>>> fundamentalists who conspire to seek political power. This very>>>>>>>>> dichotomy>>>>>>> is>>>>>>>>>> precisely that which supports the Islamo-fascist movement, hence her>>>>>> reticence in opposing it. In western democracies, no such dichotomy is>>>>>> assumed to exist in believers. Instead, what is at issue is the>>>>>>>>>> particular>>>>>>>>>> claims made by individual citizens, and whether those claims can be>>>>>> constitutionally accommodated. In other words, we do not attempt to>>>>>>>>>> condemn>>>>>>>>>> the religious right as ³Christo-fascists² and on that basis exclude>>>>>>>>> them>>>>>>> from>>>>>>>>>> the political process. Instead, we have a political and judicial>>>>>>>>> system>>>>>>> that>>>>>>>>>> operates to ensure (or tries to, sometimes more or less successfully)>>>>>>>>> to>>>>>>>>> limit political claims of religious groups to areas that are>>>>>>>>>> constitutionally>>>>>>>>>> permissible. There is no reason why precisely the same approach cannot>>>>>>>>> be>>>>>>>>> used with Muslim groups in the west. That, however, means recognizing>>>>>>>>>> their>>>>>>>>>> full rights to religious freedom on an equal basis as other groups,>>>>>>>>>> something>>>>>>>>>> that Horowitz (and perhaps Muslims Living under Muslim Laws) are>>>>>>>>> unwilling>>>>>>> to>>>>>>>>>> tolerate, albeit for different reasons. Both agree on the need to>>>>>>>>>> suppress>>>>>>>>>> public manifestations of Islam, and in that, they share many of the>>>>>>>>> same>>>>>>>>> views of Islam and Muslims. It is not surprising that they use the>>>>>>>>> same>>>>>>>>> rhetoric, as exhibited by the debate inCanada regarding use of Islamic>>>>>>>>> law>>>>>>> in>>>>>>>>>> the arbitration of family law disputes. Indeed, Daniel Pipes rejoiced>>>>>>>>> in>>>>>>> the>>>>>>>>>> outcome of that debate. So, forgive me if I am a little skeptical of>>>>>>>>>> their>>>>>>>>>> attempt to distance themselves from Horowitz et al.>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mohammad Fadel>>>>>> Assistant Professor of Law>>>>>> University of Toronto Faculty of Law>>>>>> 78 Queen's Park>>>>>> Toronto, Ontario M5S 2C5>>>>>> Canada>>>>>>>>>>>> (416) 946-0589 (office)>>>>>> (416) 978-7899 (fax)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Section for the study of Islam, American Academy of Religion>>>>>> [mailto:ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Danielle Widmann Abraham>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 11:41 AM>>>>>> To: ISLAMAAR@LISTS.PSU.EDU>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ISLAMAAR] David Horowitz "Declares" Islamo-Fascism>>>>>>>>> Awareness>>>>>>>>> Week on Campus>>>>>>>>>>>> Concerning the "islamo-fascist awareness week" - below are some>>>>>>>>> thoughts>>>>>>>>> from Marieme Hélie-Lucas, long time>>>>>> coordinator of the European Bureau of Women Living Under Muslim Laws,>>>>>>>>> for>>>>>>>>> those of you who are interested in following this issu.>>>>>>>>>>>> [originally sent to Women In Black international list, and forwarded>>>>>>>>> with>>>>>>>>> Marieme's permission.]>>>>>>>>>>>> Danielle>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________________>>>>>>>>> Dear friends in WIB,>>>>>>>>>>>> In response to the mail alerting us about this event against 'islamo>>>>>> fascism' led by conservative forces, I think there is a need for>>>>>> clarification from us, who lived under 'islamo fascism' :>>>>>>>>>>>> First of all, let me say that the term 'islamo fascism' has been>>>>>>>>> initially>>>>>>>>> coined by Algerian people struggling for democracy, against armed>>>>>> fundamentalist forces decimating people in our country, then later>>>>>>>>>> operating>>>>>>>>>> in Europe, where a number of us had taken refuge.>>>>>> For us, it has never been equated to Islam, but it points at>>>>>>>>>> fundamentalists>>>>>>>>>> only : i.e. at political forces working under the cover of religion in>>>>>>>>>> order>>>>>>>>>> to gain political power and to impose a theocracy ( The Law - singular>>>>>>>>> ->>>>>>> of>>>>>>>>>> God, unchangeable, a-historical, interpreted by self appointed old men)>>>>>> over democracy ( i.e. the laws - plural - voted by the people and>>>>>>>>>> changeable>>>>>>>>>> by the will of the people).>>>>>>>>>>>> For fundamentalists indeed are ideologically close to fascism/nazism.>>>>>>>>> Of>>>>>>>>> course one cannot equate Muslim fundamentalism to fascism because those>>>>>> phenomena happened in different times and history. However, there are>>>>>> similarities that should ring a bell to our ears : just like fascists,>>>>>> Muslim fundamentalists believe not in a superior race but in a superior>>>>>> creed, like nazis they believe that non believers or 'kofr' are>>>>>> 'untermensch' ( some of them even used this very term !) that should be>>>>>> physically eliminated ( and please please please remember that it is'>>>>>> Muslims' who do not adhere with their version of Islam that are first>>>>>> targeted by Muslim fundamentalists and are their first victims); like>>>>>> fascists they believe in a mythical past ( whether the Ancient Rome of>>>>>>>>> the>>>>>>>>> Golden Age of Islam) that justifies their superiority ; like fascists>>>>>>>>> they>>>>>>>>> are pro-capitalists; like fascists they put women in their place (>>>>>>>>> church,>>>>>>>>> kitchen and cradle); etc...>>>>>> This is why we called them 'islamo fascists'.>>>>>>>>>>>> The fact that this term has now been recuperated by the Right and even>>>>>>>>> the>>>>>>>>> Far Right, in order to express plain racism against supposedly>>>>>>>>> 'Muslim'>>>>>>>>> people is terrible and should of course be combatted.>>>>>> However we have seen over and over again in Europe well meaning people>>>>>> siding - de facto - with fundamentalists, in the name of defence of>>>>>> 'Muslims' or of 'Islam', and walking hand in hand with them in>>>>>> demonstrations.>>>>>> I therefore urge you to carefully plan how you are going to oppose the>>>>>> 'awareness week on islamo fascism,' in ways that will support the>>>>>>>>>> democratic>>>>>>>>>> forces and women within Muslim countries, and NOT reinforce the>>>>>> fundamentalist fascist forces.>>>>>> Please remember that fundamentalist forces are those who slaughter>>>>>>>>> women>>>>>>>>> everywhere in Muslim countries and communities, those who promote war>>>>>>>>> not>>>>>>>>> peace. You cannot support them in the name of anti racism and human>>>>>>>>> rights>>>>>>>>> without signing our own death penalty at the same time.>>>>>>>>>>>> If you demonstrate, as i hope you will, please>>>>>> - SUPPORT democratic anti fundamentalist forces in our countries, do>>>>>>>>> not>>>>>>> let>>>>>>>>>> fundamentalist forces manipulate you in the name of human rights.>>>>>> - Make a clear cut difference between 1. migrants from Muslim>>>>>>>>> countries,>>>>>>>>> 2.Muslim believers ( who are the only ones who should be called>>>>>>>>>> 'Muslims'),>>>>>>>>>> 3. Islam, and 4. fundamentalists: these are different categories that>>>>>> cannot be intermingled without playing into fundamentalists' game, and>>>>>> against women.>>>>>>>>>>>> I take this opportunity to let all of you know how hurt and angry i was>>>>>>>>>> when>>>>>>>>>> a statement was discussed at the end of the WIB meeting in Valencia,>>>>>>>>> that,>>>>>>>>> in its first paragraph, supported Hamas as the legitimate winner of the>>>>>> 'democratic' elections of 2006.>>>>>> It is one thing to say that western governments used a supposedly>>>>>> antifundamentalist stance to play their own game in the Middle Eats. It>>>>>>>>> is>>>>>>>>> one thing to say that Palestinian people have a right to self>>>>>>>>>> determination.>>>>>>>>>> But, as a women's organization, it is another thing to support Hamas.>>>>>>>>> As>>>>>>>>> women against war, it is another thing to equate a democratic process>>>>>>>>> with>>>>>>>>> democracy and ignore the consequences on women...>>>>>> Let me explain my point : 'democracy' has to meanings; 1. it describes>>>>>>>>> a>>>>>>>>> process of political representation through the vote of all citizens,>>>>>>>>> and>>>>>>> 2.>>>>>>>>>> it also represents an ideal of justice, equity and equality . So far>>>>>> parliamentary democracy ( i.e. the vote of all the people) is better,>>>>>>>>>> more>>>>>>>>>> just, more representative of the people, than monarchy ( the rule of>>>>>>>>> one>>>>>>>>> leader), or oligarchy ( the rule of a selected group), etc... But we>>>>>>>>>> should>>>>>>>>>> not confuse the means - elections - with the aim - a just society. Yes,>>>>>> elections are generally the imperfect but best way to come closer to a>>>>>>>>>> more>>>>>>>>>> just society - however sometimes the people make a very wrong choice>>>>>>>>> that>>>>>>>>> denies justice to a part of the people : one should remember that>>>>>>>>> Hitler>>>>>>> was>>>>>>>>>> legally elected . Despite the fact that the rule of electoral process>>>>>>>>> had>>>>>>>>> been respected, his reign in Germany cannot be counted as a phase of>>>>>> democracy i.e. more just society - definitely not for Jews, Gypsies,>>>>>>>>> gays,>>>>>>>>> disabled people, communists and political opponents in general.>>>>>> One of us in Valencia was a Palestinian lesbian citizen of Israel : you>>>>>> cannot pretend to igniore the fact that, had she lived under Hamas'>>>>>>>>> rule,>>>>>>>>> she would not have been with us, nor would have she been alive. To me,>>>>>>>>>> very>>>>>>>>>> clearly, signing a statement in favor of Hamas was signing her death>>>>>>>>>> penalty>>>>>>>>>> in the name of the rights of the Palestinian people, which we all stand>>>>>>>>>> for.>>>>>>>>>> How could WIB do that ? How could WIB agree to a hierarchy of rights>>>>>>>>> in>>>>>>>>> which people's rights, minority rights, religious rights, cultural>>>>>>>>> rights,>>>>>>>>> etc... supercede women's rights? in which women's rights are subsumed>>>>>>>>> to>>>>>>> all>>>>>>>>>> these other rights?>>>>>>>>>>>> We, women, have to invent ways to defend basic human rights and>>>>>>>>> democracy,>>>>>>>>> to combat racism and discrimination, without trading the rights and>>>>>>>>> often>>>>>>>>> the lives of our sisters in doing so.>>>>>> It is a complex task, no doubt. But i do hope that WIB will face the>>>>>> challenge.>>>>>> The opposition to this event in the USA that confuses a whole>>>>>>>>> population>>>>>>> of>>>>>>>>>> migrant descent with Muslim fundamentalists would be a good opportunity>>>>>>>>> to>>>>>>>>> design ways to face the challenge. Thanks in advance to all of those>>>>>>>>> who>>>>>>>>> will at least make the attempt !>>>>>>>>>>>> All the best to all of you>>>>>>>>>>>> marieme helie lucas>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/29/07, Daniel Martin Varisco <Daniel.M.Varisco@hofstra.edu>>>>>> Daniel.M.Varisco@hofstra.edu> > wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Colleagues,>>>>>>>>>>>> I take it as a good sign that Mr. Horowitz feels the need to>>>>>>>>> create>>>>>>> an>>>>>>>>>> Islamo-fascist awareness week and target Women's Studies Centers. I>>>>>>>>> had>>>>>>>>> naively assumed that the Islamophobic bias out there was so entrenched>>>>>>>>>> that>>>>>>>>>> such a week would be a waste of time. Maybe what we are doing is>>>>>>>>> having>>>>>>> an>>>>>>>>>> effect on campuses... At any rate, for those interested in a retort>>>>>>>>>> (which>>>>>>>>>> may be an exercise in equal inanity), I have posted about this slam>>>>>>>>> drunk>>>>>>>>> crusade on Tabsir today ( http://tabsir.net <http://tabsir.net> /).>>>>>>>>>> Comments>>>>>>>>>> invited on the blog.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Martin Varisco>>>>>>>>>>>> Chair and Professor Anthropology>>>>>>>>>>>> Hofstra University>>>>>>>>>>>> Hempstead, NY 11549>>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel.M.Varisco@hofstra.edu Daniel.M.Varisco@hofstra.edu>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2007, at 6:54 AM, David Fideler wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Friends,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whether this makes you laugh or weep, or a combination of>>>>>>>>>>>> both, this is a must-read:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=59>>>>>>>>>> < http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=59>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As is a click through to the original web page.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If only Michael Moore would make a film about this event.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David Fideler>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -->>>> Tugrul Keskin>>>>>>>> Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University>>>> Department of Sociology>>>> 560 McBryde Hall>>>> Blacksburg, VA 24061 - USA>>>> Cell:202-378-8606>>>> http://www.vt.edu>>>>>>>> " You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality.>>>> Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.">>>>>>>> Malcolm X>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --> Tugrul Keskin>> Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University> Department of Sociology> 560 McBryde Hall> Blacksburg, VA 24061 - USA> Cell:202-378-8606> http://www.vt.edu>> " You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality.> Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.">> Malcolm X>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Gabriele Marranci Lecturer in the Anthropology of Religion College of Arts and Social Sciences School of Divinity, History and Philosophy University of Aberdeen, King's College Aberdeen, AB24 3UB. Office: +44 (0)1224-273112 Fax: +44 (0) 1224-273750 http://www.abdn.ac.uk/divinity/staff/details.php?id=g.marranci Founding Editor of Contemporary Islam: www.springer.com/journal/11562 Blog: http://www.tabsir.net/ *****************************Jonathan E. BrockoppDepartment of History and Religious StudiesPennsylvania State University406 Weaver BuildingUniversity Park, PA 16802 Phone: 814-863-1338 Fax: 814-863-7840http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/e/jeb38/

Darul Ulum Deoband on a Hard Drive?

From: Nazim Mangera
To: the_ulama@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 25 August 2007 10:51 PM
Subject: [the_ulama] Darul Uloom Deoband on a Hard Drive?


Assalamu Alaikum,


In a previous email on the Ulama group, Maulana Omar Hussaini of Chicago sent out a very important email to our group which included many beneficial
suggestions. I wanted to expound on one of them. I think it's extremely
important that we digitally safeguard the knowledge of our illustrious scholars
and savants. Ever so quickly, the great scholars of the past century are
passing away. We need to save their knowledge and their method of teaching the
Darse Nizami books. The best way to do it IMHO nowadays is to record the class
lectures on a hard drive.


1 Lecture hour can be stored in 10 MB
1 GB = 100 lecture hours
100 GB = 10000 Lecture Hours
10000 Lecture Hours divided (/) by 15 Books in the whole year = 667 Hours per book.
667 hour per book / 2 hours per book = 333 Lecture Days


In other words in one year you can easily store class lectures of 15 books on a
100 GB Hard drive. Nowadays, you can even get 750GB~1TB (terabyte) hard disk
drives. In other words, you can store a whole Darul Uloom's classes on one
Hard Drive in audio files. Isn't that wonderful? Darul Uloom Deoband or
Darul Uloom Karachi or Darul Uloom Nadwatul Ulama or Darul Uloom Bowmanville (I
kid…) or any other Darul Uloom can easily be stored on one Hard Drive.


I estimate that it would only cost about $1000 (US) (including a good computer and a few mp3 players with voice recorders) to store a Darul Uloom on one hard
drive. That's peanuts compared to the amount of benefit we all can derive
from it. Not only the scholars of this group, but even Darul Ulooms across the
world and their teachers can use these lectures. If we wanted an explanation
on a certain Hadith or a Gunjalak (complicated) Ebarat, these audio files could play a huge role in making it easy for us to understand that Hadith or that
Ebarat.


The implementation is quite easy as well. Choose a few students from the various classes to record the class lectures and tell them to upload the
lectures from the mp3 player to a computer hard drive. I'm sure if we band
together and work collectively on this project, we can finalize the major and minor details of this initiative.

The other aspect of this idea is that we should ask the respected Ulama if they have recorded lessons of various classes. Ok respected Ulama. How many of you have stored lectures of your teachers on cassettes or cds? For example on the following site, they have uploaded Bukhari Lessons Jild One of Darul Uloom Deoband which I have downloaded onto cds and I listen to them especially whilst driving. Here's the site: http://www.duroos.net/Sahih%20Bukhari%20Deoband.htm


So Ulama, do you know of any Ulama who have recorded lessons? I know that Maulana Ismail Mayat of Batley, a teacher at Dewsbury, recorded Maulana Izharul Hasan's Dawrah Hadith lectures on many cassettes. Sheikhul Hadith Maulana Zakariyya (R.A.) had two beloved students and one of them was Maulana Izhar
(R.A.) who was a teacher at Nizamuddin Markaz. He was even requested by Darul
Uloom Deoband to come and teach at Darul Uloom Deoband but he had politely refused and continued teaching at Nizamuddin Markaz till the final day of his life.


Insha Allah I hope this initiative will one day see the light of day and we will be able to benefit from scholars from all across the world. The Darul Ulooms themselves should take up this task and record the lectures of their staff which would make it easy for us to collect them under one website.


Jazakumullah,
Nazim Mangera
Toronto, Canada