Friday, February 10, 2017

A Conversation in Deoband: Muslims Do Not Think They Have the Extra Burden of Defeating the BJP in Each And Every Election



By Harish Khare
Feb 10, 2017
DEOBAND is home to a great seminary, Darul Uloom, a global centre of Islamic learning. It is also what in the reporter’s short-hand is called a Muslim-dominated town in Saharanpur district of western Uttar Pradesh.
This part of UP goes to the polls tomorrow, in what is seen as a defining electoral battle, whose outcome would per force recast the Narendra Modi regime’s political priorities and preferences. This is also part of the state which was host to a violent standoff between the dominant, aggressive Jats and the Muslims, who have a sizeable presence, in the run-up to the 2014 Lok Sabha polls.
That conflict infected the mood in the entire state; a grand polarisation got effortlessly instigated and it garnered unprecedented electoral dividends for the BJP. The rest is history; but the narrative over the Muzaffarnagar violence — who did what to whom and why — continues to provide the backdrop to the 2017 assembly polls.
 It is highly pertinent to note that the BJP has not been able to find a single Muslim face to field out of a total of 400-odd candidates. And, this contest forces, willy-nilly, a revisit to one of the fundamental, but unsettled, issues — the terms of coexistence between the majority and the minorities.
 The relationship between the majority and the minorities is an indicator of the health of a polity as well as the robustness of its state order. No nation can possibly hope to achieve its national greatness without a healthy majority-minority equation.
It is no longer possible — both for the Muslims and others — to talk openly and without rancour about this relationship. Conversations in Deoband with a cross-section from the Muslim community offer a few propositions, a few disquieting insights, and, a few sobering thoughts.
Most of us do not wish to be reminded of December 6, 1992. Yet we owe it to ourselves to keep in mind that the Babri Masjid demolition had put the Hindu-Muslim equation on a new basis. Whatever historic assurances the Muslims in India might have felt had been given to them, and whatever the protection the Constitution had provided, the largest minority in the land lost its sense of equanimity on that day. That equanimity has not yet been recovered; nor has the polity made any effort to restore that feeling; and, perhaps more to the point, no one feels the need to restore that old sense of equanimity and elan.
Yet it is a measure of the Indian democratic resilience, that, most Muslim voices in Deoband assert that they do not feel “scared” of the BJP or Narendra Modi. This point got made repeatedly, not in a tone of defiance but perhaps out of a basic belief in the Indian constitutional order’s structured fairness. There is no sense of siege nor of hopelessness.
A rather subtle theme emerges from this un-afraidness. The Muslims do not think they have the extra burden of defeating the BJP in each and every election. Rather there is an acute realisation that there will be an electoral contest every now and then, and this democratic rite should not be allowed to accentuate the differences and polarisation. Nor is there any feeling that defence of the secular values and arrangements is their particular burden. Secularism is a collective undertaking and commitment. This is — or, rather should be — a chastening thought for all those politicians and political outfits who strut around as high priests of Indian secularism.
Still, another unsentimental strand of clarity emerges. Contrary to whatever the BJP and the RSS may assert, the Muslims certainly do not think of themselves as a “vote bank”. The Muslim voters, activists and leaders have happily divided themselves among the three principal non-BJP political outfits — the Samajwadi Party, the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Congress, besides many other smaller entities. If anything, the lament among the Muslim voices is that it is the BJP which has shut its doors on them. The BJP, in this view, chooses to remain indifferent to their grievances and un-accommodative of their ambitions and aspirations. It perhaps helps the BJP to keep hammering on the Muslim “vote bank” in order to induce and deepen doubts and insecurities in the majority community.
The 2013-2014 tension between the Jats and the Muslims has definitely lost its prickly edge but the polarisation between the Hindus and the Muslims remains, dormant, barely just below the surface. And, the political timidity that this polarisation has produced continues to rankle. It is pointed out that no Hindu leader — irrespective of the party — has the courage or the conviction to talk from a public platform about the Muslims’ backwardness, and society’s obligation to obviate their grievances. This is not a recent phenomenon.
The Rajinder Sachar Committee report comes up repeatedly in conversations. That committee, set up during the UPA days, had brought out the startling fact that the Muslims’ lot remained far worse than that of the Dalits. And, it is underlined that no government has had the courage to table the report in Parliament.
The BJP’s preferred mode is to invoke Rashtriyavaad in a monopolistic manner. Yet the Muslims remain unfazed. There is a confident assertion that they have no reason to feel apologetic about their loyalties and allegiances because they do not feel a fig about Saudi Arabia, the UAE or Pakistan. It is the BJP, in this view, that remains unsentimentally committed to a grammar of polarisation.
Having said that, the Muslims say they are not prepared to divest themselves of their identity or ideology in order to make themselves amenable to the BJP. Like any other section of the Indian society, they are entitled to a sense of sunvai, a sense of assurance that the Sarkar will not be indifferent to their grievances and that Hukumat will ensure that no injustice is done to any one section of society.
This is the simple but vital context to the electoral battle being fought in this western part of Uttar Pradesh-notwithstanding all the highfalutin invocation of Vikas. Yogi Adityanath and his merry-band of divisiveness-mongers are unleashed all over the state. The Samajwadi-Congress alliance, on the other hand, is promising a modernistic agenda. In her own way, Behn Mayawati of the Bahujan Samaj Party is challenging the BJP’s polarising agenda. Whatever be the outcome on March 11, one thing appears certain: the minorities are not going to turn their back on the idea of a secular India. Amen.
Source: tribuneindia.com/news/comment/a-conversation-in-deoband/362012.html
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-politics/harish-khare/a-conversation-in-deoband--muslims-do-not-think-they-have-the-extra-burden-of-defeating-the-bjp-in-each-and-every-election/d/110029#sthash.IjBBJOod.dpuf

Courage to Defend Core Values Defines a Nation


By Rashid Samnakay, New age Islam
09 February 2017
Just as the nature’s law which Newton simply articulated as ‘every action has an equal and opposite reaction” does not mean that the reaction is unqualified and always “good and beneficial” to the performer or to whom it is performed for, similarly the Core Values of a nation do not necessarily mean that those values are universally beneficial to it or of benefit to the other nations that interact with it on this planet.
In Quranic terms, therefore every action- A’mal is required to be qualified as Saleh- to produce goodly and beneficial reaction. There is nothing in it extraordinary and nothing religious, just a statement of universal truism.
However it is generally assumed that a nation’s core values are of qualified goodly nature and that they are the ones which makes it ‘assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station’ (American Declaration of Independence) which then defines the nation’s place in the world.
This was demonstrably presented to the world recently by the Speaker of the British House of Commons who expressed his opposition to the potentiality of the newly elected President of the United States of America addressing the House of Commons on his State visit to the United Kingdom. His objection was on the basis of the President’s policy seen as being contrary to British core values and that ‘he would refuse to invite the US president to speak at Westminster because of parliament’s long held opposition to “racism and to sexism”’.
Not everybody in the Parliament and outside agreed with his action, though that is not the issue; for there never is an example in the world where such unilateral and individual’s actions are accepted by everybodyایسا بھی ہے کوئی سبھی اچھا کہیں جسے is there anyone that all would consider as good?
The disagreement was on procedural matters that the Speaker of House of Lords, as an equal partner of the two houses was not consulted and a joint statement was not agreed upon. That said, it is interesting to note the following comment by the Speaker of the House of Lords:
“However, the Speaker (of the House of Commons) contacted me this morning. He told me that while he maintained his view on the issue he was generally sorry for failing to consult with me. Obviously, I accepted that apology” ……and went on to say “Allow me to say that I have spent the last 30 years campaigning against prejudice and discrimination, particularly for the rights of LGBT people and those with HIV/Aids,…”. So it seems that he too agrees with the Speaker’s core values.
The history of British political system involving the Crown, House of Lords and House of Commons is amazing and colourful, going back to sixteenth century. The ceremony of the session of Parliament’s opening by the Monarch, the Queen is seen today the world over in its full colour, pomp and glamour. Yet one aspect of the ritual of the ceremony is not appreciated by many. On the monarch’s arrival to the House of Lords, the officer of the ‘Black Rod’ is sent to summon the House of Commons but the door is shut in his face. The officer knocks on the door three times with his rod. It is then the door is opened and the members including the Speaker march to the Lords to attend and listen to the Monarch’s speech, which is written by the Government of the day for her to deliver.
Though the power of the monarchy is largely symbolic, yet any head of State visiting the UK is supposed to be at the invitation of the Queen as the head of State and Defender of the faith of the United Kingdom. Yet the independence of the house is well and truly symbolized in this ceremony. It is the Speakers of both the houses who invite the visiting dignitary to address them!
One must then assume that the invitation is extended on the basis that the nation’s core values as represented by the visiting dignitary are synchronized with the British nation’s as represented by the parliament. This is hotly debated though.
In this case the speakers of both houses of British parliament seem to have agreed what those core values are and so: “…our opposition to racism and to sexism and our support for equality before the law and an independent judiciary are hugely important considerations in the House of Commons.”
This sentiment is also echoed in the UK by over a million people so far, signing a petition against the US President’s proposed visit. Democracy in its true colour in action to their credit, at home!
There have been similar expressions however of ‘people power’ against US President’s visit. One vaguely remembers the cancellation of President Dwight Eisenhower’s planned visit to Japan due to protest against his visit there. The protest perhaps was against nuclear bombs that the US was piling up as arsenal of war and Japan’s core value of opposing it, having experienced two such bombs dropped on its cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki!.
Aside from protesting against planned visits by head of states, many nations in the Far East also have shown the courage to resist their corrupt and inapt governments and have brought them down, against heavy odds.
There was some hope that the Muslim majority nations would show some signs of awakening when tremendous courage was shown by the Iranians when they sent packing the most powerful emperor of recent times in their revolution of change, not once but twice; for he was restored to the throne by the Super power custodian of democracy, after the first ousting.
After a long pause lasting over decades a similar seed of change germinated in the so called Arab Spring in the Middle East only a few years back, culminating in the overthrow of an Egyptian pharaoh - Mubarak, always supported by the same super power. Alas, that seedling was soon crushed by his political and military offspring!
Democracy, by the Muslim leaders and the custodians of democracy it seems: is not considered suitable for them, even if it was overwhelmingly voted in. So the pharaoh’s political offspring was installed in power and is there today:  زاغوں کے تصوف میں ہیں عقابوں کے نشیمن  Eagles’ nests are in use of the crows!
Their streets are adorned with portraits of head of States that are invited to visit even if that visitor is less than welcome in other countries of the world because of what they are perceived as representing in values. But the expectation of handouts and assurances of protection of ruling class’s thrones becomes paramount consideration.
The Muslim majority countries and the so called Islamic Republics in particular are a prime example of neglect of their duty in following their Book with regards to ruling a country, in spite of their claim they believe in it as being the Book annunciating their Core Values.
Hence the Muslim nations now are defined by other than universal core values and the lack of courage to defend them. The earthly gods have forsaken them as has the Creator of the universe:
6-117- The Lord knows best who has strayed from His ways…!
----
A regular contributor to New Age Islam, Rashid Samnakay is a (Retd.) Engineer
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-the-west/rashid-samnakay,-new-age-islam/courage-to-defend-core-values-defines-a-nation/d/110030#sthash.NWhQ48KA.dpuf

Thursday, February 9, 2017

The Holy Quran: A Myth, Miracle or Reality?



By Kazi Wadud Nawaz, New Age Islam
24 January 2017
           “In the Name of Allah the most Beneficent and Merciful”
The Verses [51:20-23] as shown under references clearly manifest that Allah has kept two most authentic Books of Revelation open for Mankind – one, the Revealed Scriptures - in our case it is the Holy Quran, and the other is the Universe with all its Creations- man, nature and society and everything that exists between the heaven and the earth.
Allah speaks with mankind in the language of divine signs pervading the physical world and through the Books of Revelation. Both are the Media of communication between the Creator and His creations. There is Close Similitude between the Holy Quran and divine signs pervading the physical world. Both are manifestation of divine Truths and there is nothing miraculous in them.
To feel one with the universe is generally treated as a Mystic Approach towards cognition of Realities. Actually it is not so. The feeling of oneness with seen and unseen realities is a logical approach towards cognition of the interconnection of life with its surroundings. This is purely an intuitive drive towards logical and scientific understanding of the reality. Intense urge and yearning for principles of a sublime orderly life underlie such a Drive for attaining a generalized vision of the purpose of evolutionary process of life and the universe.
Referring to verses under Reference  [Verses 2:2-4, verses 69:51, 69:41-42, 69:41-42,& Verses 8613], we can safely conclude that the Holy Qura’n is Not a   Book of Miracles that negate Reality. There is no room for any assumption or conjecture in the holy Quran. Whatever Allah has   said in the holy Quran is based on truth and reality. The Holy Quran deals with the Truth underlying the Realities of Human life and Physical Universe to which the whole life process is intricately connected.  Entire nature and universe, all physical processes and history have been presented by the holy Quran before us as admonition and object of demonstration, to convince humanity on the existence of Allah as the creator and sustainer of the universe and deepen our understanding of divine attributes and purpose of creation.
So to treat the Holy Qur’an as a Miracle seems to be an ideological deviation on the part of Muslims very much likely to give enemies of Islam a tool for spreading falsehood about the Holy Quran and lead the “Huqq”[The Truth] towards alienation from Realities of Life.
Whatever mysterious that might happen in nature and our life beyond the periphery of human comprehension seems to us as a miracle.
Since Allah is the Eternal Truth and all His creations Seen and Unseen, manifest that Truth, there is no scope of any Miracle or Uncertainty in the Holy Quran.
Allah is Real, Life and death as divine process of Creation and Destruction is Real, Here-after and the Day of Judgment is Real, Angels, Satan, Heaven and Hell, Reward and Punishment all are Real. Amidst Current and Counter-Current of Creation, Revelation, Evolution, Death and Destruction whirling all around us, there is little scope of any conjecture or miracle in the Holy Quran. Quran never approves of any miracle that negates reality.
There are a number of ancient stories in the Holy Quran that sound like miracle but actually not so. The stated competition Between the Prophet Musa(AS) and Sorcerers of Pharaoh ,and similar other stories appear  to be a Miracle but in reality they  reflect the eternal struggle between the truth and falsehood. And in that contest truth always gets upper-hand and wins the battle. The stories clearly uphold the eternal truth that Falsehood might assume any form and dimension, it is bound to fail, but Truth will always triumph.
The Holy Quran is a divine admonition and statement of the Truth that guides humanity and presents a generalized vision of the physical and spiritual realities.    Any quest for Miracles in the Holy Quran stems from lack of knowledge and emerges out of our inherent weakness in Faith.
References
·       This is the Book: In it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah, who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them. And who believe in the Revelation sent to you, and sent before your time,(in their hearts ) have the assurance of the Hereafter”[Verses 2:2-4].
·       “Verily it is the Truth of Assured Certainty”[verses 69:51]
·       “It is not the word of a poet: little it is you believe! Nor is it the word of a soothsayer, little admonition you receive!”[69:41-42]
·       On the earth there are signs for those of assured faith. As also in your own selves: will ye not then see? ---Then by the Lord of Heaven and Earth, this is the very Truth, as much as the fact that you can speak intelligently with each other.” [51:20-23]
·       This is the Word that distinguishes(Good from the Evils)
[Verses 8613]
---
Engr. Kazi Wadud Nawaz is an NGO Development Consultant
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/kazi-wadud-nawaz,-new-age-islam/the-holy-quran--a-myth,-miracle-or-reality?/d/109832#sthash.UTdH0wRg.dpuf

Mulla Community Has Hijacked Islam to Divide and Rule


By Syed Sadruddin Hussain, New Age Islam
04 February 2017
Due to lack of Quranic knowledge by simply reciting and HIFZ of Quran without understanding, we Desi Muslims are more divided and exploited in religious matters and rituals.
The Mulla community has hijacked Islam to divide and rule us as our Pope and Bishops, Gurus and Pundits barred in the Quran. Hence we should all read the translation of Quran in our own language to understand Islam correctly and to avoid the middle man role of the Mullas.
All humans are equal and directly answerable and accountable for our deeds and misdeeds to Allah alone. No special DUA of any Imam, Pir, Faqir, Alim, and bogus Wasila etc. is going to help us.
Arabic Quran is basically meant for the then deviated and Kafir Arabs to read and understand it and embrace Islam. Allah is above all languages, dialects etc. and knows and understand the requests, calls, Dua, actions, movement of the sane and insane, deaf and dump, sick and disabled persons directly.
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/letter-to-the-editor/syed-sadruddin-hussain,-new-age-islam/mulla-community-has-hijacked-islam-to-divide-and-rule/d/109957#sthash.mqPbTKiU.dpuf

Can A Muslim Ever Be Anti-Semitic?


By Rashid Samnakay, New Age Islam
28 January 2017
Around the Mediterranean coast almost all countries and those of the Middle East are supposed to be Semitic people speaking Arabic and other Semitic languages, such as Hebrew language that the Jews consider as their religious and national language, and therefore they all are counted as Semitic people.
For the Muslim nation as a whole, which considers Saudi Arabia, the cradle of Islam and the birth place of Messenger Muhammad, a samite, cannot by any stretch of imagination be branded as anti-Semitic. That would be thoroughly blasphemous. Therefore to say that Muslims, as followers of the faith Islam are anti-Semitic is compounding the felony since they, just as the Jews claim to be of the “nation of Ibrahim” because they follow the faith established by Aba Abraham, long before Moses and Muhammad were born.
Today anti-Semitism is exclusively taken as “hating the Jews”. In Europe, both the West and the East, which is not Semitic, hatred of Jews and persecution is well-documented history and well established practice of anti-Semitism there; culminating in the holocaust of six million Jews. The word holocaust is therefore exclusively applied today to the elimination policy of Jews in Germany, a European country and not a North African, Middle Eastern country, or Palestine. The later, country which gave the Jews sanctuary since Moses time!
Let us commemorate today, along with the Jews, the victims of that dreadful event called the holocaust, perpetrated in Europe!
The Christian Church in general and Catholic Church in particular have been scathing of Jews on religious ground and critical of its Zionist manifestation, till very recently. It was in our lifetime that Pope John Paul II who should be thanked for reversing the well-established Jew-hating culture of Europe.
There were very many people on both sides of the argument-fence, supporting or condemning the Jews/Zionists. But their actions, since the formation of the State of Israel are a bone of contention. There are even famous people who deny the holocaust, unbelievable as it may seem!
Such condemnation has in some quarters taken the form of hatred of Jews and can be considered as anti-Semitic but to generalise any legitimate criticism of Israel, its creators, its supporters as anti-Semitisms, is brattish, a sign of immaturity and a complex of insecurity on the part of Jews.
Zionism is considered by many as apartheid of the old South African kind practiced under the banner of Christianity, racism and colonialism of the worst kind and compared to conquistadors of South America. Expulsion of Palestinians and violence against them has become the hallmark of Zionist Israel. Not surprisingly the Reformed Jews were against the “return” to Palestine on religious pretext.
The Palestinians people as major stake holders were not even consulted and were not included in the negotiation process to grant their land to the Jews. Goodly sounding promises by the powers to be were made and humanitarian pledges given in political statement which were clearly not meant to be honoured and were not ever honoured.
Israel, the Jewish/Zionist State’s insecurity stems from its callous, unthankful and immoral actions of biting the hands that had nourished them with mana from heaven from the time of Moses who sought refuge with his few followers in Palestine, to escape from the brutalities of Pharaoh.
Thus Palestinian nation comprises of many different people including Jews; and Moses followers who settled there later.  Palestine was never a Tera nullius as Zionist would have us believe. So it has never been an exclusive Jewish land to claim as its own. They were settled there under some given conditions – a “covenant” with God which they had broken number of times, hence lost the land as many times.
Recently, after the WWII, in sympathy for the Jews for having suffered persecution at their hands the Europeans felt pangs of conscience and supported the idea of giving the Jews land of their own. Perhaps also expecting as a by-product a solution in it to solve the problems they were causing in their countries. To that effect large piece of land was “offered to them in Uganda or Argentina” as if it was Tera nullius, said historian Professor Ali Mazrui of East Africa; which offer the Jews rejected. They wanted the holy land promised by God in spite of the fact God had bestowed it upon them number of times before and finally withdrew His favour on account of them having broken the “covenant” as many times. God is merciful but He too has His limit for He has to be fair and just!
The persecution of Palestinians by the Israelis is therefore all the more strange. Having been driven from one country to another over centuries, of all the people they should be more understanding of what it means to drive people from their home and hearth. Then also they are the people of the Book and no Book advocates such acts in its true essence. Thankfulness is a virtue. The insecurity of the Zionists is therefore resultant self- generated.
The Palestinians, particularly the land holders and feudal lords are also to be blamed. They sold their lands to the Zionists at asking prices and are enjoying themselves in foreign lands. Now the landless Palestinians are suffering the consequences of the greed, corruption and treachery of the elite. In addition to that the Palestinians are divided amongst themselves and divided people can never succeed to achieve a common goal.
There are other people and foreign nations too involved in maintaining the status quo for their vested interest. It seems that is the politics of the powers on earth.
Criticism of Zionist Israel is valid on many fronts, but to say that this criticism is anti-Semitism on the part of Muslims; as was the case with Catholic Church till recently, is naïve. Particularly in the context of Muslims in general, for they consider the Jews as their brethren in Faith. But the Israelis have adopted the stance that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic and immediately draw out that card, or hoist the holocaust flag!
The holocaust did occur; whether six million or six matters not. One does not have to wait for the Jews to displace and kill six million Palestinians for the world to accept it as holocaust. Even one such life taken is genocide of a nation and that is the justification for criticism, irrespective of who perpetrates the crime; Muslims, Semites and non-Semites. Man’s inhumanity to man recognises no boundaries and has not stopped from time immemorial!
Palestine could be and should be the multi-faith Capital State of the so called people of the Book, brethren in faith. If only Moses or Muhammad would reappear to sort this out it would be better for humanity as a whole. But alas neither of them is expected to do so and it is too late and beyond the ken of the likes of Aba Abraham!
The solution must lie in the sincerity of good intentions of those who masquerade as policeman and peace-keepers in the world, to really want to bring Peace on earth. On the contrary they have very obvious agendas of keeping the pot boiling so as never to let the WAR industry go bankrupt. It is bad economics as it causes huge unemployment at home!
While that policy is being implemented, it is self-evident truth that the Palestinians are being slowly but surely annihilated. The recent UN resolution against Israel is evidence of that. The US very kindly did not cast its veto to block it, but as a cowardly gesture abstained from voting for the resolution supported by rest of the world! How strange it is that when others say similar things, it is fair criticism but when a Muslim points it out, it is anti-Semitism and then inevitably other skeletons fall out of the closet.
----
A regular contributor to New Age Islam, Rashid Samnakay is a (Retd.) Engineer
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/rashid-samnakay,-new-age-islam/can-a-muslim-ever-be-anti-semitic?/d/109879#sthash.E4ev8MqD.dpuf

A Call To American / Global Muslim Leaders To Search Their Souls And Lead Their Youth To Become Good Global Citizens With The Turn Of Events In The Wake Of The Recent Travel Ban



By Muhammad Yunus, New Age Islam
02 February 2017
(Co-author (Jointly with Ashfaque Ullah Syed), Essential Message of Islam, Amana Publications, USA, 2009.)
 In one of his articles referenced below, the author had expressed his profound disappointment and disgust with the Ulema of Islam for their reluctance to launch a thunderous protest and take out street processions to denounce or even outlaw ISIS for slaughtering innocent non-Muslims and even Muslims calling out Allah u Akbar:
Through this essay he is registering his profound disappointment with a selective set of Muslim community leaders of America whom he had sent a series of e-mails to provoke a furious and visible denunciation of ISIS as a gesture of their solidarity with the non-Muslims, who are selectively killed and brutalized by this monstrous outfit. More than a year ago he made a compelling appeal to this select group, supported by forceful arguments to organize massive protest (rallies) against ISIS in some of the major American cities with sizeable Muslim populations, with participants carrying banners with slogans extracted from Dr. Morrow’s Fatwa that reads as follows:
 But all was in vain. The result is just beginning to unfold with banning of all nationals (Muslims) of seven Muslim majority countries from travelling to America and blocking the Syrian immigrants from entering America. The author had forewarned this in these words:
“Put ting in one word ISIS ideology has rocked the foundation of Islam. If not outlawed, those opposed to Islam will capitalize on it to impose increasing restrictions on Muslims and more of Muslim lands will be invaded, occupied and Muslims in the secular, Western, and Muslim minority countries will be increasingly marginalized, if not persecuted. It must be corrected before the Muslims are forced to do so.”
Coming to the crux of the matter, the Muslim leadership must take lesson from the Christians and non-Muslims who are protesting against the travel ban on their behalf since the signing of the Executive Order just a few days ago. They are taking to streets, flocking the airports, carrying banners against the ban and giving speeches with fury and passion to show their solidarity with the Muslims. Therefore, the Muslim leadership worldwide must take any instance of a terror attack against the non-Muslims very seriously, organise massive protest rallies condemning and outlawing terrorism, and showing their deep concern for and solidarity with the victims and offering mass prayers for the them.
 By a totally unforeseeable turn of events, the Muslims have earned the sympathy of the Western world and are projected as victims rather than oppressors. This is indeed a blessing in disguise and demolishes the rapidly emerging notion of clash of civilization. World Muslim leaders must respond in the like manner and exploit the travel ban as a means to diffuse anti-Western sentiments in their communities. The Muslims of the world must understand that as at this moment, they are in the good books of a large section of the Western population despite the rising tide of Islamophobia for more than two decades. Hence all efforts must be made by all concerned to diffuse radicalisation and root out terrorism in the name of Islam.
In one word, with the turn of events, the Muslims must conduct themselves as good human being and show as much concern for the others as the others are showing for them in the capitals of the Western world and in the courts of America today. There is a lesson in it for the Muslim leadership and God-sent opportunity as well to change the course of civilization from heading towards a clash to taking the path of rapprochement. They have to tell their fellow Muslims that Islam is not in danger. The Christians and the non-Muslims who are selflessly agitating against the travel ban on their behalf have hijacked the true spirit of Islam – service to humanity and excellence in lawful pursuits and left the Muslims with the title of Islam without any great urge to serve humanity or passion for excellence. Therefore the Muslims need not fight to defend their faith or their Prophet. They have to fight their way in the arena of life in the most peaceful manner, excel in lawful pursuits, establish themselves as respectable citizens and serve their community and their nation, and should be a source of comfort to others and not a cause of fear – as they stand today.   
To lend legitimacy to my exhortation to rapprochement let me quote the following verses from the Qur’an dating from its concluding period:
 “O People! We have created you as male and female, and made you into races and communities* for you to get to know each other. The noblest among you near God are those of you who are the most heedful (morally upright).  Indeed God is All-Knowing and Informed” (49:13).
“... And let not the hatred of a people who (once) obstructed you from (entering the) Sacred House, lead you to be hostile. Therefore, help each other to virtue and uprightness, and do not collaborate with each other in sin and enmity. Heed God, and (remember,) God is severe in punishment” (5:2).
“It may be that God will bring about love between you and those of them you (now) regard as your enemies. (Remember,) God is Able (to do anything) and God is Most Forgiving and Merciful (60:7)
Let no ignorant, traitor or twister of faith say that these verses are from an early (Meccan) phase of revelation and abrogated. They all are from the concluding phase of the revelation and reflect Islamic vision of “a universal brotherhood of humanity that will allow people of diverse faith, culture, colour and language to live together, to know each other and to assist each other to make life easy and peaceful for all human beings” [Ch. 9.7, Essential Message of Islam]
May God guide Muslim leaders to the upright path.
---
Muhammad Yunus, a Chemical Engineering graduate from Indian Institute of Technology, and a retired corporate executive has been engaged in an in-depth study of the Qur’an since early 90’s, focusing on its core message. He has co-authored the referred exegetic work, which received the approval of al-Azhar al-Sharif, Cairo in 2002, and following restructuring and refinement was endorsed and authenticated by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl of UCLA, and published by Amana Publications, Maryland, USA, 2009.
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islamic-society/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/a-call-to-american-/-global-muslim-leaders-to-search-their-souls-and-lead-their-youth-to-become-good-global-citizens-with-the-turn-of-events-in-the-wake-of-the-recent-travel-ban/d/109929#sthash.WIr2hk57.dpuf

How Trump Can Defeat ISIS



By Sharmine Narwani
February 08, 2017
"American Conservative" - If you were betting on an unpredictable Donald J. Trump to transform America’s bankrupt Mideast policy scene, these next ten words will burst your bubble.
“As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice,” National Security Advisor Michael Flynn told reporters a mere thirteen days into the new administration.
Iran?
If you recall, Trump came roaring off the campaign trail with the foreign policy priority of defeating ISIS, so why the sudden confrontation with the Islamic Republic of Iran? Though Flynn apparently thinks otherwise, ISIS and Iran are not the same thing at all—they are the exact antithesis of each other.
Iran is a natural regional hegemon by virtue of its size, population, and development indicators. The Shia-majority nation has not initiated war in centuries, forges state-to-state relations using soft power tools, and prides itself on its diversifying knowledge-based economy, rich cultural heritage, and respect for diversity.
ISIS is a non-state actor driven by a radical, Wahhabi-infused interpretation of Islam that uses violent terror tactics to seize territory and subjugate populations. ISIS’s reign of terror has been marked by extreme intolerance for other views, the destruction of cultural and historic sites, and the wholesale massacre of people it considers infidels—the Shia in particular.
And now Trump looks set to ignore the foundational truth that scuppered both Obama and Clinton efforts in the Mideast: you cannot pick fights with both ISIS and Iran and expect to win anything. You have to pick one—or prepare to hunker down for endless conflict.
Terror groups like ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other Salafist militants in their strongholds of Syria and Iraq view Iran as their core regional adversary. The Islamic Republic of Iran, after all, is allied with both Damascus and Baghdad. Iran trains, arms, or guides the armies and militias now successfully mowing down jihadists.
Every time the U.S. intervenes to isolate or diminish Iran’s role, it only undermines the regional ground forces that do the heavy lifting against ISIS and al-Qaeda.
Washington’s Iran hawks panic over Tehran’s recent ascendance from the Levant to the Persian Gulf, but Iran’s improved regional stature comes courtesy of the rise of ISIS and al-Qaeda in these areas. All this is fuelled directly by the U.S. and its NATO and Arab allies, who backed the extremist rebels who drew in Iran.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Regional states view the fight against ISIS and al-Qaeda as an existential one and will fight them to the death. The stakes are not nearly as bleak for the U.S., many miles away from the gory battlefields. But the consequences of unleashing Jihadi terror—in part, to contain Iran and its allies—have now seeped onto western shores and made security a national priority.
Is Washington prepared to break from its failed policy trajectory and make the crucial choice between Iran and ISIS? Because if Trump is willing to do that, a plan to defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda is in easy reach—and it will barely cost the deal-making businessman a dime.
Big Bang, Small Bucks
All the military components necessary to defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda currently exist inside Syria and Iraq. There are the armed forces of both states, accompanied by large volunteer-based militias operating under a central command structure. They are assisted by the Russian air force in Syria and the U.S.-led coalition air forces in Iraq, and flanked by secure western borders in Lebanon and eastern ones in Iran.
But what’s missing is a commitment by all external parties to coordinate their mission around a singular goal—the destruction of ISIS and al-Qaeda, to the exclusion of all other ambitions or interests.
That means Washington will have to cast aside its long-held claim that the only force available to fight ISIS is a Kurdish and Sunni Arab one. The multi-sect and multi-ethnic Syrian and Iraqi national armies and their allied militias would beg to disagree, and they now wield the evidence of many victories against ISIS and al-Qaeda.
Mainstream U.S. media frequently dismisses or ignores these advances, mainly because traditional American foes (and Shiites) are the driving forces behind them. But it’s silly to exclude the Shia from a security solution. Today, they form a majority demographic from the Levant to the Persian Gulf, and are the obvious local source of manpower to fight the existential ISIS and al-Qaeda threat directed at their own populations.
Other interventions that will not address this central threat—like defeating or weakening Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, partitioning states, establishing Kurdish federations, and backing militant groups—must stop. The U.S. and its allies must instead focus on the collective task of securing borders, sharing intelligence, thwarting financiers of terrorism, and coordinating sensitive military operations under a command sanctioned by Russia and Syria.
When Trump sits down with Russian President Vladimir Putin at their as yet-unannounced first meeting, there is ample opportunity for the two leaders to cast their weight behind a joint singular mission.
At his inauguration, Trump promised: “We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world—but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.”
From this must come the recognition that Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon also want to pursue their own interests, in their own regions.
A joint U.S.-Russian deal to focus primarily on defeating ISIS and al-Qaeda may result in a Syria with Assad and a stronger, more secure Iran, but the upside is huge—and globally significant.
The “war on terror” will be won, an important notch on Trump’s belt for both domestic constituents and international audiences. He will have managed this feat at minimal cost and with no American boots on the ground. Washington’s positive collaboration in defeating terror will open up Mideast markets that were not previously accessible because of politics or security. The sources of inspiration and funding for worldwide jihad will be culled. And Trump can take credit for an extraordinary, Nixon-like rapprochement with the Russian Federation, yanking the two states away from the brink of confrontation and ushering in a new era of bilateral cooperation.
While Washington may have to downsize some traditional relationships in the process, the damage can be contained. Abandoning the Obama administration’s Kurdish projects will ensure that U.S.-Turkish relations can get back on track, and that Arab-Iranian-Turkish mistrust of American and Kurdish intentions will fade.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other major financiers of ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Salafist militias will have to be brought to heel, but their interest in the Syrian and Iraqi battlefields have lessened anyway as contracting economies, domestic restiveness, and conflict in Yemen have intensified. Their security infrastructures are so intertwined with the U.S. military that they cannot afford to clash with Trump on a subject as universally reviled as terror financing.
As for the Israelis and their Iran fixation, Americans can’t be expected to sideline vital national security interests to perpetually babysit that state. Trump can take credit for making Israel safer, and that’s that.
But none of this can be achieved if the Trump administration continues to confront Iran simultaneously. There are no Kurdish or Sunni Arab troops able to defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda alone. If the U.S. had been able to amass and train enough of them, Washington would have already done it in Iraq, circa 2003.
As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov points out, “Iran has never been complicit in any links to IS or Al-Nusra Front whatsoever. Moreover, Iran contributes to combatting IS. We have long advocated the idea of creating a unified anti-terrorist front. I am convinced that Iran must be part of our common effort if we evaluate potential contributors to such an alliance objectively.”
Can Trump slice through the conventional Beltway mindset on Iran, particularly given the Iran hawks he has gathered around him? Will the efficiency of an alternative plan appeal to him enough to break free? Will the decisive CEO in him emerge, or are we stuck with an insecure, inexperienced politician who cleaves to the guidance of trusted old hands who lack new ideas?
Because here’s the rub. The Syrians, Iranians, Iraqis, Lebanese, and Russians are defeating ISIS and al-Qaeda anyway, with or without the United States.
Let’s see what happens when Trump meets Putin.
---
Sharmine Narwani is a commentator and analyst of Mideast geopolitics, based in Beirut.
Source: informationclearinghouse.info/46403.htm
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-the-west/sharmine-narwani/how-trump-can-defeat-isis/d/110010#sthash.b7rrCYOP.dpuf

Media Jihadists Bring News From All Over The World That They Can Disseminate



By Owen Bennet-Jones
February 9th, 2017
YOU might think that being a press officer of the militant Islamic State group at the moment would be a distinctly demoralising experience. The days of rapid territorial advances winning shocked headlines around the globe are over. And with the Iraqi and Syrian government forces advancing in both Mosul and northern Syria, there is from IS’s point of view, lots of bad news. But the jihadists who fight by the keyboard rather than the sword might see things rather differently. Because, even if they are on the back foot in key battlegrounds, each week brings news from all over the world that they can disseminate.
Take the month of January. Open-source reporting suggests that, excluding lone-wolf operations that may or may not have been inspired by IS, the organisation mounted at least 37 separate attacks in nine different countries: Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Egypt, Afghanistan, Libya and Somalia.
IS also attempted an attack in Saudi Arabia but the two would-be suicide bombers were shot before they could detonate themselves. In that incident, IS lost two fighters while killing no one. But overall the organisation killed at least 393 people at the cost of just 30 of its own fighters. All these figures are conservative estimates; it is likely that many attacks will have gone unreported by generally reliable media sources, especially in IS-held territory where independent reporting is impossible.
The nature of the IS campaign drew a sharp comment from the Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, who in a 15-minute audio message released on Jan 5 called on his supporters to attack the US and its allies. Al Zawahiri complained that IS was not only running a campaign to defame and undermine Al Qaeda but also ignoring his advice on targeting. Al Qaeda has long favoured attacking the far enemy in the US rather than the near enemy in the Middle East and North Africa.
IS has used many methods to kill its opponents. Eight of the deaths were the result of ‘judicial’ processes: five people in Iraq — a mother and her four children — were burnt alive, and in Syria two men accused of being spies were crucified and one accused of sorcery was beheaded.
At the other end of the scale, car bombs, by far IS’s most deadly weapon, killed 199 people in just 12 attacks. Other ways IS killed people included gunfire, suicide vests, roadside bombs, sticky bombs (attached to vehicles) and, in a breakthrough for the group, a drone strike. That took place near Mosul and reportedly killed an elder and his son. It seems IS has mastered not only detonating a drone as it hits a target but also dropping munitions from a drone in the sky.
As those technological breakthroughs suggest, the group’s press officers were not restricted to reporting violent actions. They produced many other kinds of editorial content. A video showing the northern Syrian town of Al Bab deserted after a Turkish attack was shot by a camera mounted on a drone.
Meanwhile, the IS magazine Rumiyah urged supporters in the West to mount arson attacks, which it described as “a quick option for anyone intending to join the just terror campaign”.
Ideal places to hit, the magazine suggested, included hospitals and schools as well as more traditional targets such as nightclubs. And to ensure everyone was aware of who mounted an attack, the article urged followers to write that IS was responsible by using a permanent marker on a nearby wall. And in a sign of just how ambitious IS’s media operation is, Rumiyah was published in English, French, Russian, German, Turkish, Bosnian, Indonesian, Kurdish, Pashto and Uighur.
The so-called Islamic State did acknowledge its setbacks — or at least some of them — and there was a significant amount of comment on the running battles the group is fighting in Iraq and Syria. IS was forced to admit that it had lost control of the luxury Nineveh International Hotel in northeast Mosul. Previously IS had highlighted the capture of the hotel in May 2015 as a significant and notable victory. At that time, videos of the hotel showed families enjoying facilities beneath balloons and the IS black flag. On another occasion, there was coverage of a Quran memorisation competition for children at the hotel.
Other examples of coverage generated by IS press officers included reports of an attack on pylons in Egypt and Iraq where, as the reporting made clear, the cables destroyed provided electricity to Shia communities. There was also a claim that IS had captured five villages from Kurdish forces in western Raqqa province in Syria after a surprise attack. The report claimed that, in the midst of the fighting, a US air strike mistakenly hit Kurdish forces.
So even if IS is suffering serious reverses, their press officers can find plenty of work to do.
----
Owen Bennet-Jones is a British journalist and author of Pakistan: Eye of the Storm.
Source: dawn.com/news/1313556/media-jihadists
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-the-media/owen-bennet-jones/media-jihadists-bring-news-from-all-over-the-world-that-they-can-disseminate/d/110011#sthash.H4qMuTe6.dpuf

Radical Islamic Terrorism Poses a Very Small Threat to America




By Dr. Craig Considine
02/08/2017
President Trump tweeted yesterday that “The threat from radical Islamic terrorism is very real, just look at what is happening in Europe and the Middle East.” His comment suggests that “radical Islamic terrorism” is the greatest threat to the United States and that his administration will take steps to eradicate this danger from the world.
The tweet should not come as a surprise. Business Insider recently discussed how depicting foreign terrorists as a grave threat to Americans has been sacrosanct to Trump’s immigration ban. His executive order immediately barred about 220 million people from seven Muslim-majority countries from setting foot on American soil for the next few months. “We cannot gamble with American lives,” Department of Homeland secretary John Kelly said in reaction to the executive order. “I will not gamble with American lives.”
So be it.
I am certainly no fan of terrorism in any form, whether it be “Islamic” or not, but that is not the topic of discussion here. I want to talk about the real threats that Americans face. I want to point out things that have been proven to be more dangerous than “radical Islamic terrorism.” And I want to do this by presenting some research and facts.
According to New America, a Washington think tank, “radical Islamic terrorists” launched nine attacks since 2002 that murdered 45, while the right-wing extremists struck 18 times, leaving 48 dead. In an earlier study, New America examined groups “engaged in violent extremist activity” and found that white extremists were by far the most dangerous.
According to a September 2016 study by Alex Norasteh at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, some 3,024 Americans died from 1975 through 2015 due to foreign-born terrorism. That number includes 9/11. Since that day, however, foreign-born terrorists have killed roughly one American per year. Norasteh’s research concludes that the average likelihood of an American being killed in a terrorist attack by any kind of immigrant in any given year is one in 3.6 million.
Writing in the Washington Post, Andrew Shaver found that since 9/11, Americans have been no more likely to die at the hands of terrorists than being crushed to death by unstable televisions and furniture.
Compared to the threat posed by refugee terrorists, which Trump’s executive order is allegedly designed to curtail, the Business Insider calculated the lifetime odds of death by combing reports from the National Safety Council and the National Centre for Health Statistics. The Insider found that Americans are:
1) 6 times more likely to die from a shark attack;
2) 29 times more likely to die from a regional asteroid strike;
3) 260 times more likely to be struck and killed by lighting;
4) 4,7000 times more likely to die in an airplane or spaceship
5) 407,000 times more likely to die in a motor vehicle incident; and
6) 6.9 million times more likely to die from cancer or heart disease
Meanwhile, in the time it takes you to read this post, at least a few Americans will have died from a heart attack. Within the hour of reading this post, someone in the United States will have died from skin cancer. And by the time you turn the light off to sleep this evening, somewhere around 100 Americans will have died throughout the day in vehicular accidents (these statistics have been lifted from the Shaver article).
What does all this mean? Americans are far more likely to die walking out the door, getting into a car, jumping into a pool, or simply standing up than by the hands of “radical Muslims.”
Donald Trump wants you to be afraid. He wants to have control over your mind. He thrives on hate and conspiracy theories. He is currently engaged in a War On Reality.
And here is the reality on the War On Reality. Trump’s administration is going to craft insane public policies to target “radical Islamic terrorism,” which is a waste of money. It will amount to excessive public spending on a make-believe threat. The billions and perhaps trillions of dollars that his administration will pump into “anti-Islamic terrorism” campaigns is, as the facts show, unwarranted.
But, of course, we all know that facts don’t matter to the President.
Source: craigconsidinetcd.com/2017/02/08/fact-check-radical-islamic-terrorism-poses-a-very-small-threat-to-america/
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-the-west/dr-craig-considine/radical-islamic-terrorism-poses-a-very-small-threat-to-america/d/110012#sthash.q0MnJBEQ.dpuf

What Does The Bible Say About The Treatment Of Immigrants, Refugees?



By Mathew Schmalz
2/5/17
On Friday, Jan. 27, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that placed a stay on refugees from seven Muslim majority countries. Entrance of refugees from Syria, however, will be banned for the next 120 days. Two days prior to that, he committed the United States to building a wall on its border with Mexico. Soon after the order, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto cancelled an upcoming trip to the United States.
President Trump has also proposed that Mexican goods be taxed at the rate of 20 percent to provide funds for building the wall. This would fulfil his campaign promise that Mexico would actually pay for the wall’s construction, in spite of America’s southern neighbour’s protests.
For Christians, the questions about building the border wall or permitting immigrants and refugees into the United States involve a host of associated considerations not just about the specifics of immigration law, the economics of cheap labor coming across the border or potential terrorist threats.
At issue are both broader and deeper questions about what it means to welcome the stranger.
As a Roman Catholic scholar who lived in South Asia for a total of four years, I know what it is like to be initially considered a “stranger” but be quickly welcomed with open arms. And I, like all Christians, look to the Bible for guidance when asking about how to best welcome the stranger.
So, what does the Bible actually say?
We will all be strangers, sometime
The Bible affirms—strongly and unequivocally—the obligation to treat strangers with dignity and hospitality.
In “Love the Stranger,” an article written for the annual meeting of the College Theological Society in 1991, biblical scholar Alice Laffey stated that in the Hebrew Bible, the words “gûr” and “gēr” are the ones most often glossed as referring to the “stranger,” though they are also translated as “newcomer” and “alien” or “resident alien,” respectively.
In the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the word “gēr” appears almost 50 times, and the fifth book, Deuteronomy, delineates a number of specific provisions for treating “the stranger” not just with courtesy but also with active support and provision.
For example, the book of Deuteronomy sets out the requirement that a portion of produce be set aside by farmers every third year for strangers, widows and orphans. In the “temple sermon” attributed to the prophet Jeremiah, the Jewish people are exhorted to “not oppress the sojourner.”
Within the Hebrew Bible the requirements of hospitality are sometimes affirmed in very striking ways, as in the story from the book of Judges in which a host offers his own daughter to ruffians in order to safeguard his guest.
Of course, the Israelites themselves were “strangers” during their enslavement in Egypt and captivity in Babylon. The Hebrew Bible recognizes that every one of us can be a stranger and, for that very reason, we need to overcome our fear of those who live among us whom we do not know.
The Stranger Is Jesus in Disguise
Within the New Testament, which Christians read in continuity with the Hebrew Bible or “The Old Testament,” the most often cited passage dealing with welcoming the stranger is from Matthew 25: 31-40.
This section speaks of the Final Judgment, when the righteous will be granted paradise and unrepentant sinners will be consigned to eternal fire. Christ says to those at his right hand that they are “blessed” because, “I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” The righteous then ask, “When did we see you, a stranger, and welcome you?” Christ replies,” ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’”
As Matthew 25 makes clear, the Christians should see everyone as “Christ” in the flesh. Indeed, scholars argue that in the New Testament, “stranger” and “neighbour” are in fact synonymous. Thus the Golden Rule, “love your neighbour as yourself,” refers not just to people whom you know—your “neighbours” in a conventional sense—but also to people whom you do not know.
Beyond this, in the letters written by Paul of Tarsus (one of the most notable of early Christian missionaries), often known as the Pauline “Epistles,” it is made clear that in Christ, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave[g] nor free, there is no male and female.”
From this perspective, being “one in Christ” should be taken literally as acknowledging no fundamental differences in kind among human beings.
Bible Is Unambiguous In Its Message
Of course, in Christianity the strong admonitions toward treating the stranger with dignity have coexisted with actions that would seem to indicate an opposite attitude: pogroms against Jews, slavery, imperialism and colonialism have been sanctioned by Christians who nonetheless would have affirmed biblical principles regarding caring for those who seem “other” or “alien.”
Indeed, when it comes to the specific questions concerning building a wall on America’s border with Mexico or welcoming immigrants and refugees, some Christians would argue that doing so does not violate any biblical precepts concerning hospitality to the stranger, since the issue is one of legality and, of course, a good number of Christians did indeed support Donald Trump’s candidacy for the presidency.
Other Christians have taken a diametrically different position, and have called for cities and educational institutions to be set apart as “safe zones” for undocumented immigrants.
It is true that the application of biblical principles to contemporary matters of policy is less than clear to the many Christians who have taken opposing sides regarding how the United States should deal with immigrants, undocumented workers and refugees.
However, in my reading of the Bible, the principles regarding welcoming the stranger are broad-reaching and unambiguous.
-----
Mathew Schmalz is Associate Professor of Religion, College of the Holy Cross
Source: europe.newsweek.com/what-bible-say-treatment-immigrants-refugees-550338?rm=eu
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/mathew-schmalz/what-does-the-bible-say-about-the-treatment-of-immigrants,-refugees?/d/110013#sthash.wnjAYdkZ.dpuf

A Mosque Burns And a Synagogue Shares



By Rabbi Allen Maller
09 February 2017
In the small Gulf Coast city of Victoria, Texas, there are several churches, but just one synagogue, and one mosque. At least that’s how it was, until the mosque, built in 2000, mysteriously burned down at about 2am on Saturday January 28, 2017. Now, the synagogue has become a mosque because the Jews of Victoria handed the Muslims the key to their synagogue building, so they could share a place to worship while rebuilding their own Mosque.
“Everyone knows everybody, I know several members of the mosque, and we felt for them,” said Robert Loeb, the President of Bnai Israel, which affiliates with the Reconstructionist movement.
On Sunday January 29, the Victoria community held an interfaith event in front of the mosque. Through local donations and a GoFundMe page, the mosque raised over $900,000 from 18,000+ people by Monday to rebuild the mosque. Let this be a notice to future hate-filled arsonists, and all those who hate America, that brotherly love is the truest form of religion in America.
This account of brotherly love is a modern descendant of the following archetypical fable, transmitted orally in both Arabic and Hebrew for many centuries, and finally written down in several different versions in the 19th century. The fable illustrates how two holy places can be as closely connected as two lungs, even though they are far apart geographically, and exist in different religious worlds. Some say this happened in the generation when Abraham was born.
Two brothers, who inherited a ‘valley to hilltop’ farm from their father, divided the land in half so that each one could farm his own section. Over time, the older brother married and had four children, while the younger brother was still not married. One year there was very little rain, and the crop was very meagre. This was at the beginning of a long term drought that would turn the whole valley into an arid, treeless desert where even grain did not grow, and all the springs dried up. The younger brother lay awake one night praying and thought: “My brother has a wife and four children to feed, and I have no children. He needs more grain than I do, especially now that grain is scarce.”
 So that night, the younger brother went to his barn, gathered a large sack of wheat, and left his wheat in his brother’s barn. Then he returned home, feeling pleased with himself.
Earlier that very same night, the older brother was also lying awake praying for rain when he thought: “In my old age, my wife and I will have our grown children to take care of us, as well as grandchildren to enjoy, while my brother may have no children. He should at least sell more grain from his fields now, so he can provide for himself in his old age. So that night, the older brother also gathered a large sack of wheat, and left it in his brother’s barn, and returned home, feeling pleased with himself.
The next morning, the younger brother, surprised to see the amount of grain in his barn seemed unchanged, said “I did not take as much wheat as I thought. Tonight I will take more.” That same morning, the older brother, standing in his barn, was thinking the same thoughts.
After night fell; each brother gathered a greater amount of wheat from his barn and in the dark, secretly delivered it to his brother’s barn. The next morning, the brothers were again puzzled and perplexed. “How can I be mistaken?” each one thought. “There’s the same amount of grain here as there was before. This is impossible! Tonight I will make no mistake—I will take two large sacks.”
The third night, more determined than ever, each brother gathered two large sacks of wheat from his barn, loaded them onto a cart, and slowly pulled his cart toward his brother’s barn. In the moonlight, each brother noticed a figure in the distance. When the two brothers got closer, each recognized the form of the other and the load he was pulling, and they both realized what had happened! Without a word, they dropped the ropes of their carts, ran to each other and embraced.”
Only God can make something holy, and God, through the brothers’ love and concern for each other made their descendants worthy to rebuild a primordial Holy House in this valley, and later to build a new Holy House on that far hill. So God sent Messengers to their descendants to guide them to do this.
Christians and Jews say the hilltop is Jerusalem. Muslims say the valley is Makkah.
I say they are both right.
God gave humans two lungs to recycle the holy spirit within humans, among humans and between humans and God.
When all those, both near and far, who revere these sacred places as a standard, share it in love with everyone else who reveres it, then Abraham’s request for Allah to “make this a land of peace, and provide its people with the produce of the land” (Qur’an 2:126) will be extended throughout the world and all the children of Adam, Noah and Abraham will live in Holiness, Peace and Prosperity.
Source: themuslimvibe.com/muslim-current-affairs-news/a-mosque-burns-and-a-synagogue-shares
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/rabbi-allen-maller/a-mosque-burns-and-a-synagogue-shares/d/110014#sthash.aOdGaWP8.dpuf