Abu Uthman al-Sabani al-Shafii (d 449) in his book Kitab ul Maitain narrates Prophet Muhammad as saying, “towards the end of the time, four main groups of people will flock around the Kaaba to perform Hajj: The powerful rulers to have fun or to enjoy the occasion, the rich people to promote their businesses, the poor to seek financial support and the reciters (or scholars) to demonstrate their skills.”

Al-Sabuni was not an ordinary scholar. He narrated the Hadith after ensuring that the matan or text and isnad or chains are sound. He once said “I never narrated a Hadith nor a non-Prophetic report in a gathering except if I possessed its chain of transmission; nor did I ever enter the library except in a state of ritual purity; nor did I ever narrate Hadith, nor hold a gathering, nor teach, except in a state of ritual purity.”

Are we living in that period that was predicted by the Prophet? Has Hajj really become a type of ritual devoid of any meaning? Is Hajj an individual ibada (worship) that requires a believer to spend time and resources to get closer to an omni-potent and omni-present God? Has the Hajj become a business in our times? Or has it become a vacation?

There was a time when people would spend months and months preparing themselves financially and spiritually to live the real meaning of Hajj. However now a days Hajj is offered as a holiday package. Many Hajj agencies all over the world offer value packages with super programs, deluxe programs and short executive program. These programs offer the best and closest accommodation in Makkah and Medinah, best available food and best possible position in the House of Allah. Depending how much you pay, you can get the finest place in Makkah and Medinah. If you happen to be the guest of royalty, then probably, no one can ever compete with your placement in the two mosques. When the Prophet performed his only Hajj, the only provision that he had with him was no more than four dirham as narrated in several books of ahadith.

Hajj was meant to teach the pilgrims endurance and perseverance for higher causes, yet it has been turned into an exercise in convenience. Hajj was meant to express the utmost humility in the presence of the rest of humanity by declaring that “Here I am, Here I am, I will not make anyone Allah’s partner. Allah is the one who is in control of everything and He alone is the one who is the source of all blessings and praise.” Yet, today, Hajj, for many has become, a badge, a symbol of spiritual arrogance.

Hajj is an institution that is supposed to reassure the people that ethnic, cultural, linguistic, geographical, wealth-based, race and color differences that humans have imposed upon themselves have no reality in the presence of God. All are one and the purpose of all is to follow the divine guidance to create a universal humanity to the well being of everyone. Hajj is meant to be a pledge to live example of Hajj beyond the Hajj. It is an occasion to create a personality without a dimension and space.

Yet, through social engineering and manipulation of resources, Hajj is rapidly adapting social elements that distinguish the rich from the poor, the very institution that it is supposed to demolish. Divisions among Hujjaj on the basis of their ethnicity and money are visible throughout the Hajj journey.

While the hujjaj coming from poorer regions of the world may find accommodation miles away from the Haram, those who are rich can find accommodation within the vicinity of the Kaaba.

Quran describes Kaaba as a center of guidance to humanity. “Indeed the first House of Worship open to all was established in the Noble Makkah. Indeed this House is the center of guidance to all humanity.” (3:96) The place was not only a place for bringing together all the people but it is a center for promoting peace. (2:145). It was a place that was meant to help humanity realize its universality rather than divisions (5:97)

For this great purpose of helping humanity realize its dream of removing all the differences and divisions among themselves the institution Hajj come up with the clear example of making us understand and observe that unity of humanity is possible. For this the Quran asked Prophet Ibrahim to invite people to Hajj, so that they may witness the beauty and magnificence of the guidance of Allah.

Hajj is like a united nations in its real sense without five elitist powers. With no hidden agenda and security council privileges, each nation and community comes to Makkah with the single purpose of serving God and reiterating their covenant with Him. Hajj provides the opportunity to everyone to witness the common bonds among people regardless of their differences. Hajj promotes the idea of dignity of human beings, male or female, young or old and rich and poor.

Hajj also creates space for intellectual ideas among people so that they could all remain focused on their main agenda of serving humanity through following the guidance of God.

It is this spirit of Hajj that was prevalent at the time of the Prophet and his trusted companions. It is this spirit of Hajj is now being challenged by the modern business-dominated society and hierarchy of rich and poor culture. However, among all this razzmatazz, still there are people who come to the Hajj to take the inspiration to transform themselves for a better future both for them and for others. They are the ones who do not care about big hotels or better facilities. They are the ones who spend their days and nights in Mina, Arafat, Muzdalfa, Makkah and Medina. Here they remember the covenant that Allah made with Prophet Abraham, the builder of Kaaba. Prophet Abraham was told by God, Almighty, “I am making you the source of balance and inspiration (The Quran uses the word Imam, that literally means the instrument that a construction worker uses to level the construction) for all people,” (2:124). Encouraged by this honor, the Prophet asked: “Is this covenant for my progeny too,” No” said Allah, “Those who deviate from my path would not qualify for this honor,” (2:124)

In these simple words thus was described the real intent and purpose of the Hajj and all other faith based institutions. The dignity and honor does not come with buying this or that package. It comes through dedication and commitment to the divine values and living up to them.

Some day, the Hajj will be restored to its original intent by those un-known and un-recognized faces who come from all over the world quietly without any fanfare and who spend every moment of their presence in the noble sanctuaries and the pilgrimage path with the determination to follow their real leaders: Prophets Ibrahim, Prophet Ismail and Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon them, in every aspect of this great institution.

The re-enactment of acts performed during the Hajj are attributed to Prophets Ibrahim and Ismal and Mother Hagar. The are primarily meant for the purpose of reminding the humanity that in order to bring people together, God’s guidance is received, acknowledged, accepted and followed by a small group of people who may not be present physically to see the fruits of their efforts. Prophet Ibrahim created that nucleaus for perpetual change in human behavior and for that he was honored by God who declared him as an Imam (role model) for humanity. The guidance that inspired Prophet Ibrahim to put the dream of one people under God in reality is there in its most clear, puritan, crystal form in the Quran. How ironic it is that despite the guidance, many remain misguided including those who claim to have understood and mastered the divine guidance.

by W.G. Dunlop W.g. Dunlop – Tue Aug 31,

DUBAI (AFP) – America and its core principles are compatible with Islam, the US imam behind a controversial initiative to build an Islamic centre near the site of the 9/11 attacks said Tuesday in Dubai.

“The American way of thinking, the American construct, is extremely co-congruent with the Islamic world view,” Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said at the Dubai School of Government.

His visit to the United Arab Emirates is the last leg of a US State Department-sponsored trip that has already taken him to Bahrain and Qatar.

The aim of the visit was for Abdul Rauf to “talk about Muslim life in America” and his “work promoting inter-faith dialogue,” according to a statement by the US embassy in Abu Dhabi announcing the visit.

Abdul Rauf specifically singled out principles outlined in the 1776 US Declaration of Independence from Britain as being in line with Islamic thought.

He noted that the Declaration describes life, liberty and property — changed in the final version to the “pursuit of happiness” — as “inalienable rights.”

“I cannot fail but be struck by how these rights that are described, parallel what Islamic jurists have written, six centuries before it and more,” Abdul Rauf said.

There was a consensus among Islamic scholars at that time that “the whole objective of Islamic law… is to further and protect five, and some say six, fundamental issues” — life, dignity, religion, family, property and intellect, he said.

“The very definition of the American way of being, the very definition of the American existential viewpoint… is consistent with the very thinking of Muslim scholars,” Abdul Rauf said.

Freedom of religion in America also squares with the Islamic principle that “there shall be no coercion or compulsion in matters of faith or religion,” he said.

“The real battlefront” is between moderates and extremists, not Muslims and non-Muslims, Abdul Rauf said

(Muslims are only happy to share this occasion of rejoices with America. We appreciate the message given by the President of the United States and are honored to report that message sent for Muslims on our website in the following)

Washington DC

Message by President Obama on the Occasion of Eid Post on 2010-09-09

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
September 9, 2010

Statement by the President on the Occasion of Eid-ul-Fitr

As Ramadan comes to an end, Michelle and I extend our best wishes to Muslims in the United States and around the world on the occasion of Eid-ul-Fitr. For Muslims all over the world, Eid ul-Fitr marks the end of a holy month of fasting and prayer. It is a time of self-reflection focusing on the values that Muslims and people of all faiths share - charity, community, cooperation and compassion. This year’s Eid is also an occasion to reflect on the importance of religious tolerance and to recognize the positive role that religious communities of all faiths, including Muslims, have played in American life.

On this Eid, those devastated by the recent floods in Pakistan will be on the minds of many around the world. To help in the tremendous relief, recovery, and reconstruction effort for the floods, all Americans can participate by donating to the Pakistan Relief Fund at www.state.gov.

On behalf of the American people, we congratulate Muslims in the United States and around the world on this blessed day. Eid Mubarak.

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://www.america.gov)

Mosques, Muslims and America in Darkness

The author start out with faulting the former President Bush as the worst President and so on, but acknowledges his wisdom on one thing relative to Muslims. He said

“We are not at war with Islam or Muslims”, and thus kept lid on the hate of christians for Muslims

Well, he’s gone now, and the dogs are off the leash. The proposed construction of the Cordoba House two blocks from the World Trade Center site has given the far-right the opportunity to unveil the one flag they really salute: hatred, divisiveness and fear. For whatever reason, Mr. Bush has chosen to remain silent while his former minions drag the GOP and the country even further into darkness - his spokesman issued a “no comment” on Tuesday regarding the matter, in fact - so it falls to cooler heads to try and prevail. The problem is, my head isn’t all that cool. I’m furious and disgusted over this situation, over the fact that once again, the far-right media establishment has successfully dragged us all to the edge of a cliff, over the fact that too many of us are wallowing in our worst selves.

So let’s get a few things straight.

First of all, the Cordoba House is not a “Ground Zero Mosque.” It is a Muslim community center, it is two blocks away from the site, and in a neighborhood that already has a mosque…and a strip club, and a lot of other stuff that makes talk about “desecrating hallowed ground” sound like the nonsense that it is.

Oh, and by the by, a lot of the people quacking about “hallowed ground” are the same cretins who refused to pony up funding for 9/11 rescue workers who desperately need health care when the bill came before Congress. I’m pretty used to broadband Republican hypocrisy - the core of their power in politics, after all, is their utter and complete lack of shame - but this just sends me over the moon. Money for continuing the Bush-era tax cuts for rich people? Sure. Money for people who charged into the fire and dust and smoke on that day, who are now dying by inches because of their heroism? Not so much. And P.S., all Muslims are bad. Got that? It’s the Republican way.

As for the idea that the Cordoba House is going to be a nest of radicals, well, the Imam in charge of the project - Feisal Abdul Rauf - is as sensible and progressive and sane as anyone you know. For God’s sake, Mr. Bush hired the man to help America try to treat with the Muslim world, and Rauf advised the FBI on counter-terrorism tasctics, which are a pretty interesting couple of line items on the resume of a so-called fanatic. I’d like to thank The Rude Pundit for putting together a collection of Imam Rauf’s observations on women’s rights, terrorism, and murder. Because he’s a Muslim, too many people will immediately expect his views to be along the lines of those seventh-century lunatics who give Islam the bad name it enjoys.

Not so much:

Really, oh, sweet, imbecilic right-wingers? Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative, which dares to want cheap real estate in New York City in order to build a Muslim community center, is a radical? Really? Does anyone actually understand the meaning of “radical” anymore?

Here’s what he’s said over the last few years. Mullah Omar, he ain’t:

“The issue of women’s rights is more than an issue for women or about women. It involves everyone…The best of you are those who are best to their women. Consequently, the worst of men are those who are worst to their women.”- From the Yemen Times, August 9, 2009, at a conference on advancing the cause of women in Islam.

Rauf believes in “showing those who resort to violence that it is counter to the very idea of Islam.” - From the Khaleej Times (UAE), July 5, 2009.

“Islam denounces suicide of any sort, especially suicide bombings that kill innocents. Even in a defensive war sanctioned by Islamic law, suicide is expressly forbidden.” - From a June 2009 commentary by Rauf.

“The Quran expressly and unambiguously prohibits the coercion of faith because that violates a fundamental human right - the right to a free conscience. The Quran says in one place ’There shall be no compulsion in religion.’ And in another it says, ’To you your beliefs and to me, mine.’”- Same as above.

“Rauf was one of the few Muslim leaders who appealed for calm and tolerance after the Regensburg speech.” From the New Yorker, April 2, 2007, regarding Pope Benedict’s 2006 lecture where he quoted a Muslim-hating Byzantine emperor. Riots ensued.

Young Muslims “are deeply frustrated by what’s going on in the name of Islam. They feel they are paying a price for actions done by a very, very negligible minority, but which capture the attention of the media. Terrorism done in the name of Islam has hurt Muslims as much, if not more, than it has hurt Westerners.” - From a June 2006 U.S. State Department press release on a conference regarding Muslim youths.

Wow, what a total madman. Or not.

There is no better place on Earth for a progressive Muslim facilitty than near the site where Islam was horribly stained by the actions of a few motherless bastard renegades. Imam Rauf seeks, in his own words, to “push back” against the radicals within his faith through the Cordoba House. It is, in a way, an apology for what happened on 9/11, a repudiation of the perversion of Islam that inspired it, and an avenue for reconciliation and forgiveness. I’m no Christian scholar, but I do recall hearing some stuff about forgiveness in my CCD classes.

Speaking of apologies (and motherless bastards), it was Newt Gingrich who injected an incredible dose of stupidity into this disgusting debate. Newt said, “You know, Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There’s no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center.”

Yeah, this one has me ballistic. Pearl Harbor and the Holocaust were perpetrated by two militarized, nation-based, nationalistic empires. 9/11 was pulled off by a small cohort of fanatics who, thanks to the gross negligence of the Bush administration, got incredibly lucky on one single day. Germany and Japan, it should be noted, apologized for their actions in World War II, and we accepted those apologies, even though their actions killed millions. 9/11 was terrible. World War II was by many orders of magnitude worse, and was made possible by entities that are in no way comparable to a handful of misogynistic throwbacks on the far fringes of Islam.

This whole ridiculous thing is nothing more or less than a midterm election Trojan Horse deployed by the GOP to try and win back the power they lost in 2006 and 2008, and the “mainstream” media appears all too happy to go along. People in this country are justifiably terrified right now, thanks to the results of Republican economic theory we are currently enduring, and the temptation to lash out at something, anything, is all too close to the skin. For two years now - more, actually, if you count the ’08 campaign - the GOP has been calling President Obama (and through him, the Democrats) a Muslim terrorist fanatic. The blogger most responsible for this mosque frenzy went so far as to claim Obama’s father was Malcolm X, so this whole crapshow is right in their wheelhouse. They are preying on our fears, and have found fertile ground due to the circumstances we find ourselves in, and it is as deplorable as anything the GOP has pulled in their long and sorry history.

A lot of this bad noise is coming from the so-called Christians on the right, who think all of Islam is coming to destroy America, who call that faith a cult, who paint every Muslim as a murdering radical, and who make no bones about the internment-camp solutions they have for this so-called “problem.” I think it fitting to remind those people that it was good Christians who enslaved and murdered millions of Africans, who gave blankets infected with smallpox to Native Americans and very nearly annihilated them all, who thought “separate but equal” was a bully idea, and who did all of these things because the victims were the non-Christian/dark-skinned “other.” We’re knocking on that door again, and only Hell lies behind it.

A little bit of Scripture from the newest “other”:

A true Muslim is the one who does not defame or abuse others; but the truly righteous becomes a refuge for humankind, their lives and their properties.

- Mohammad

Be wary of malice, for malice consumes virtues, just as fire consumes fuel.

- Mohammad

The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.

- Mohammed

The most excellent jihad (struggle) is that for the conquest of self.

- Mohammed

Especially if you are well-to-do, see that no one goes hungry or naked.

- Mohammed

Believers, Jews, Sabaeans or Christians - whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does what is right - shall have nothing to fear or regret.

- the Quran

Sounds a lot like the Bible, right? There’s a reason for that. Sure, the Quran has plenty of verses that seek to kindle the worst activities of humankind, but guess what? I can point you to five dozen Bible verses that advocate slavery, murder, hatred, and violence to a degree that puts what is in the Quran in deep shade. Exodus and Leviticus leap nimbly to mind. In short, Christians and Christianity are in no position to judge anyone, anywhere, ever.

The philosopher Denis Diderot once said, “Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” I don’t go that far, but for sure this whole sad, sorry issue makes me want to strangle myself with my own intestines. In so many ways, including this mosque issue, we are falling backwards into a darkness from which there is no recovery. Well-meaning people can object to the building of a Muslim facility near the World Trade Center site, but the way this has played out is a blot on the soul of America. We have to be better than that

The most frequently recurring words for charity in the Holy Quran are Infaq, which means spending benevolently; Ihsan, which means the doing of good; Zakat, which means growth or purification, and Sadaqah, which is derived from the root, Sidq, meaning truth, and comes to signify a charitable deed.

The very words used to donate charitable deeds are an indication of the broadness of the concept.

The Holy Quran not only lays stress on such great deeds of charity as the emancipation of slaves, the feeding or the poor, taking care of orphans and doing good to humanity in general, but gives equal emphasis to smaller acts of benevolence. It is for this reason that the withholding of ma’un, which specially indicates small acts of kindness and charity, is stated to be against the spirit of prayer.

And in a similar strain the speaking of kind words to parents is referred to as Ihsan, and generally the use of kind words is recommended as in itself a charitable deed in many places in the Holy Quran. The Holy Book also speaks of extending charity not only to all men, including believers and non-believers, but also to the dumb creations.

Charity, in the sense of giving away one’s wealth, is of two kinds, voluntary and obligatory. Voluntary charity is generally mentioned in the Holy Quran as Infaq or Ihsan or Sadaqah, and though the Holy Book is full of injunctions on this subject, and hardly a leaf is turned which does not bring to mind the grand object of the service of humanity as the goal of man’s life, the subject is specifically dealt with in the 36th and 37th sections of the second chapter.

A charitable deed must be done as a duty which man owes to man, so that it conveys no idea of the superiority of the giver or the inferiority of the receiver. Love of Almighty God should be the motive of all charitable deeds so that the very doing of them fosters the feeling that all mankind is but a single family. Only good things and well-earned money should be given in charity.

Charity has value only if something good and valuable is given, which has been honourably earned or acquired by the giver or which is produced in nature and can be referred to as bounty of Almighty God.

These may include such things as are of use and value to others though they many be of less use to us or superfluous to us on account of our having acquired something more suitable for our station in life, for example discarded clothes, or an old horse or used motor car. But if the horse is vicious, or the car engine is so far gone that it is dangerous to use, then the gift is worse than useless — it is positively harmful, and the giver is doing a wrong. It applies to fraudulent company promoters, who earn great credit by giving away in charity some of their ill-gotten gains, or to robbers (even if they call themselves by high sounding names).

Charitable deeds may be carried out openly or secretly, although the latter form is better. Those who do not beg should be the first to receive charity.

Obligatory charity is generally mentioned under the name of Zakat. The word Zakat is derived from Zaka, which means it (a plant) grew. The word Zakat is also used in the sense of purity from sin.

Zakat is wealth which is taken from the rich and given to the poor, being so called because it make the wealth grow, or because the giving away of wealth is a source of purification. In fact, both these reasons hold true. The giving away of wealth to the poor members of the community, while, no doubt, a source of blessing to the individual, also increases the wealth of the community as a whole. At the same time it purifies the heart of the giver, ridding it of the inordinate love of wealth, which brings numerous sins in its train. The holy Prophet himself has described Zakat as wealth “which is taken from the rich and returned to the poor”.

The two commandments, to keep up prayer and to give Zakat, often go together, and this combination of the two is met within the earliest chapters of the Holy Quran as well in those, which were revealed towards the end of the holy Prophet’s life. Not only are prayer and charity mentioned together in a large number of passages but these two are also treated as being the basic ordinances of the religion of Islam.

Muslims living in America are estimated to be in the range of 4-7 million depending upon who does the estimating and which measuring instrument one uses. PEW (2007) estimates Muslims to be in the lower direction. On the whole, Muslims resemble the general American population in their socioeconomic variables (earnings, education, employment) and other indicators, such as church attendance- 50% of Muslims attend mosque, and voter registration- 66% of Muslims are registered. However, on abortion and gay marriage issues, Muslims appear to be more conservative and resemble the Christian Right. About 1/5 of Muslims are America born blacks, while the rest are immigrants, who came to America mostly in 70’s and 80’s and have become naturalized citizens. The children of these immigrants who have come of age are naturalized citizens also, or they are America born. Thus combining all citizenship by birth or naturalization, the Muslims group in America represents a very significant percentage of American citizens. But are they American?

Do these citizens have American Identity?

Only about 1% of 307 participants at the 43rd ISNA convention considered themselves to be Americans first (“Muslims for Safe America”, 2006). While a PEW survey (2007) found the number to be much higher, it did not change the finding that Muslims subscribing to American identity are in the minority.

Why did an “American emphasis” fail in these cases? And that failure persists regardless of the fact that Muslims have lived in America for extended periods (25+ years)? Generally, the length of time in this country has been found to be a significant determinant in the degree of Americanization (Akhtar, 2004) While reasons for a lack of Americanization are several, we will skip them since they do not have a data base. But of the ones that were included in the survey, three reasons were checked by a predominant majority of respondents – approaching 80 %, in the Pew survey. They are as follows

1) Resurgence of a desire to show an “Islamic Identity”

2) The perception that “America is at war with Islam”

3) American foreign policy that is hostile to Muslims as shown in her invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the ominous signals to Iran.

Defining Identity

Do we go by an internal desire to be “American,” or by an outward behavior to match the general “American” pattern? Both aspects are vital to the identity definition. Outwardly defined, Identity is viewed in a Social Perspective as a function of society- specified roles and expectations that an individual is supposed to meet - along with standards of excellence for evaluation. For instance, who is a Muslim and who is not a Muslim, is judged by the community. Sometimes certain communities of Muslims have gone too far in their depraved emphasis of the Muslim identity and resorted to tragic killings of other Muslims because these were not Muslims in their extremist thinking. It is sad because Fiqh scholars generally are in agreement that anyone who calls oneself Muslim, and exhibits the behavior by professing the Shahadah, is to be taken as a Muslim. Similarly in judging one as “American,” loyalty and other Behavioral criteria have to be met – these issues are to be considered later. A Psychological Perspective comes into play when the individual internalizes the role, personally commits to it, and makes it part of his/her self. The typical identity related decisions an individual makes pertain to various roles. The roles he/she likes tend to be the ones the individual is good at, and gets acceptance for, hence selects them for self-defining and self-differentiating.

Group Identity

Similar principles apply to group identity with one key exception. Here, group orientation is maximized while individual identification is minimized. Parameters characterizing group orientation include the following:

a) Main Goal is the maintenance, enhancement or survival of one’s group, often at the expense of ridicule, subjugation, humiliation and sometime killing members of the ‘Other Group’. Jokes against the newly migrant groups in America such as polish people and Catholics – still fresh in memory, are familiar examples of how a group functions

b) Group Differentiation and Group Definition exaggerated. Here, adopting features to sharpen differences with other groups is considered vital. Some familiar bases for differentiation are race, color, religion, gender, tribe, caste-class and many more – all condemned by Islam except ‘Tawas.’- piety that is the only basis accepted for prioritization. Yet, these differentiations continue with their tyrannical results in many Muslim countries. These exaggerations often defy rationality and beg questions such as: why commonalities between Christians and Muslims, for instance, do not catch our attention as much as the issue of Trinity? Similarly, while the difference between Sunnis and Shias is on the caliphate issue, there is agreement on practically all other fundamental issues. Thus, is it rational for them to hold this grudge about something that happened more than 1,300 years ago and ironically that cannot be reversed by any act of any one presently? Does that make sense? The explanation for this inheres in the need for differentiation.

c) Symbols, Signs, and Loyalties. Often, these are overpowering, and their power is derived from their function to serve the group’s needs to differentiate and identify itself. Signs and symbols are Codes devised by the group to be used to allow entrance as an “In-Group” member and to keep out “aliens.” Examples of some familiar symbols are the cross, crescent, head scarf, beard, observance of Muharram or observance of super-bowl football and the attendant festivities. These are symbols, often accompanied by their signified meanings. Similarly, many symbols can function to bestow an “American” identity. But when you bestow some symbols to a select few in an artificial situation removed from reality, it is often bound to be faulty and misleading. Muslims are fully familiar with this as many of them suffer humiliation whenever they cross the border; they are profiled as terrorists. While the system is aware of this discriminatory measure and of the large degree of its inefficacy, it chooses to ignore it to serve the dominant society and because of the larger group’s perceived need for security, which is crucial.

d) Power, Leader, Media. All above-mentioned features are sanctified by the group and carry tremendous power and thus significantly impact individuals. If a group leader or the media calls a certain group dangerous, it impacts the entire nation – regardless of reality. Often, power corrupts, leaders and heads of the state similarly exploit. When the mind of the nation is seized by fright, it stops checking on the leaders’ vested interests; the whole nation is then at the mercy of leaders and the media. Unfortunately, the manner in which all ingredients are being mixed in the current “recipe” might prove to be a recipe for disaster for all, threatening wars between Islam versus West and Iran versus America.

e) Race to raise one’s rank in the eyes of the leaders and the group at large. Records sometime might be falsified against ‘the other-group’ by media and leaders to prove they are loyal and “champions of the group.”

Both nations are caught in a Catch-22. America is fearful and resentful because it was attacked for no legitimate reason. Thus placed in a defensive posture, it had to impose surveillance devices and profiling procedures. These are discriminatory and at times result in mistreatment, unjustified torture, and humiliation of the entire Muslim community – adding fuel to their resentment and feeling of alienation. This further retards the development of an “American” identity in them. That leaves Muslims more negative, more fearful and more hostile; this in turn necessitates more discriminatory profiling and further security measures and some new measures added .That engenders more hostility in Muslims There is an emerging new fear of the terroristic elements in America-born young Muslims. This has been noticed more in Europe, via bombing incidents. This vicious cycle goes on while entrapping thousands of people from both groups caught in a senseless web. The key to untangle ourselves is to recognize that people on both sides are simple humans who are overwhelmed by the dynamics of their groups. It is with this perspective that we have highlighted the above-mentioned key elements. We will add a few more illustrations in the next section to deepen this line of understanding. Let us not make a mistake in recognizing that the course we are on currently is more than vicious: it is deadly for both nations and should be countered jointly by both nations on all fronts. From the Muslims side, we are making a dispassionate attempt in this paper to contribute to a better understanding. We are confident that similar efforts are being made on the “American” side as well. We are aware, for instance, of American efforts to expose the dishonesty of American media and leaders in intellectual discussions and the political vein. We are touched by those Americans who take a stand in sympathy with Muslims, rather than supporting the “popular” view. For example, an expose of the plight of Muslims done by a Muslim was awarded a Peace Prize by a Divisions of American Psychological Association – which is among the largest organization of professionals in the country. (Obama’s speeches delivered later than the date the article was done are by far the most valiant attempts from the side of America to correct the America’s stereotyping and misconceiving of Muslims).

Symbolic loyalty as a critical factor illustrated

The current situation has its roots in the 9/11 incident which is viewed as the main cause of the Muslims problems. To test the accuracy of this view, let us change the scenario and let us imagine that Muslims were fairly well-established in their loyalty to America prior to 9/11. How would the fall of the World trade Center per se have affected America? The affect would have been very mild and not enough, in our opinion, to work up the whole country into a frenzy of paranoia and a state of panic. That incident would have been dismissed as an isolated act of a dozen of lunatics who were rotten apples of the Muslims group. The reality of course as it prevails is drastically different because the loyalty perception of Muslims was not – and still is not – established. In that overall context, therefore, 9/11 became the symbol of possibly more attacks to come. Thus the whole Muslim nation became suspect that naturally warranted subjecting the entire Muslim community to a gigantic inquisition extending the borders to Iraq, Afghanistan and practically the whole world. What has been the total cost? Trillions of dollars; incalculable loss of lives; a blow to the image of, and international trust in, America. Additionally more pertinent to our perspective is the loss of American identity among Muslims in America that will adversely inflict a damage that will continue over generations to come.

While actual loyalty to defend the country is important, the role of symbolic loyalty is more crucial in everyday dynamics. Let us examine the 2008 presidential campaign and the tough time Obama had in defending himself on his symbolic loyalty. Nobody was focusing on the actual loyalty of Obama himself. The media appeared entranced by Obama’s pastor’s utterances – which were disrespectful to America and hence symbolically implied his disloyalty. Actually the pastor’s record by way of serving in the army and in the community was rather good. While mentioned by the media in some hurry, it was suppressed in favor of sensational stuff which various TV networks were racing to out-do the others because of the lure of advertising dollars, backed up by adversarial comments from Clinton and McCain. It became a crisis. Another instance of the symbolic nature of the loyalty issue became evident again in Obama, in the form of his avoidance of the contact with Muslims during the campaign. America takes it for fact that Muslims are terrorists. While Obama’s identity as Christian and his loyalty is firmly established, why should his legitimate contacts with Muslims, for which he is legally entitled, raise eyebrows? The explanation is the symbolic disloyalty implied by association with Muslims. Still worse is the association when Obama was portrayed as dressed in the Osama Bin Laden’s robe along with his turban.

Muslims fears and exaggerations caused in their own dynamics.

So far we have confined the discussion to the phenomenon of exaggerated fears among Americans – aptly phrased as Islamophobia. What about its counterpart among Muslims? They also have their own sensitivities centering around the loyalty concerns. About 20 years ago, we may recollect that collaboration with Jews, even in an interfaith framework, was not allowed among Muslims; it would sound the alarm of a ‘kafir’. The whole group would target the “guilty” one with full force and isolate him. Now, the same behavior is acceptable. Muslims also have their fears exaggerated and over-generalized. Jerry Falwell slandered and defiled our prophet diagnosing him as pedophile; that was ignorant and needed to be condemned. But our exaggerated fears can also be discerned when everybody was alerted to the danger of American conspiracy and the news was spread at an amazing speed accentuating the level of anger among Muslims at each step. Little display was given to the news with little recognition that the person who wrote a forceful rebuttal to the pedophile charge was a Christian leader himself and was American indeed. Even if entire America shows malevolence towards Muslims, do we have to understand it necessarily as a conspiracy against Islam, rather than the result of human dynamics? This is an established fact that practically every immigrant group arriving in America had to deal with malevolence. For instance, about a century ago, signs displayed in Boston stores read: ‘no Jews allowed holding public office’. Jews withstood it and are established now because they took a positive approach. We had better stop here before we become offensive and our own identity is suspect and questions are raised about our allegiance. Recognizing these as valid concerns, we do not mind submitting in all humility a denial of any lure – money or other kind, goading our writing. Our sole motif is to raise the issue for possible benefit of all.

Why Muslims of America need American identity

It is an established fact that to avail the benefits from America, or any society, immigrants have to adjust to American ways in order to be accepted. The fuller the adjustment, the fuller is the acceptance. Muslims need American identity for full acceptance and for full membership into “in-group”. Naturally, the society has a differential scale for “in-group” as opposed to the “other-group” for its reward- punishment distribution. For middle to high-level jobs that presuppose skills and their certifications in the form of credentials, Muslims have little difficulty. It is on the highest managerial kind of positions that Muslims have huge difficulty for several reasons. They have difficulty attaining these types of positions because these positions seem to require more than what meets the eye, or more than what can be defined in specified skills. Or they are positions that presuppose public trust and confidence, or are government positions with security concerns, or high political offices, which command a following of the masses and require proven loyalty-, refer to the previous discussion on Obama and symbolic loyalty; all such positions would be inaccessible to Muslims. To remedy this issue Muslims must clarify their loyalty and establish their American identity, if they want power, influence, dignity or just sheer acceptance from American society.

So far the gains suggested from identity were at the level of the society, but let us not overlook the less obvious gains at the Psychological level that Muslims need for their internal harmony and mental health. There are Muslims who start out with their old identity and refuse to adjust to or even acknowledge the live forces that surround them in America would suffer failures and the resulting sense of inferiority and despair. Then there are some people who may ignore their basic beliefs and go ahead with their American pursuits and achieve success. This pretense, however, may work to a degree but sooner or later it will catch up in the form of serious internal conflicts causing depression, anxiety or other problems. For best adjustment what Muslims need (Akhtar, 2007, p 91) is a predominant acceptance of American forces, not necessarily the entire American practices that will allow for the American identity? Be aware that American identity has to be integrated in a compatible fashion, not just co-exist with the old identity. While Muslims ethnic identity would be most incompatible, Islamic identity will nicely combine with American practices- to be discussed later.

Positive Participation

Sociologists agree that, to become integrated into their new home, immigrants must actively participate in their local community. Unfortunately however, since immigrants are often in a state of shock at significant cultural differences, they tend to cling to their own group and isolate themselves from their new environment .It is an established sociological truth that the sooner they can integrate themselves into the “new” society, the better it will be for all. Strangeness produces fear and familiarity brings liking and openness. Given some time for interaction, the immigrant picks up basic skills to be accepted as a group member and to accept new roles. Muslims have lived long enough in America to be adept in all they are expected to do – except that the basic feeling for America appears missing. They feel discriminated against, mistreated and humiliated, which makes them feel insecure and inferior. The doctor’s prescription for Muslims still is to participate – and participate positively. This extra demand is to enable them to overcome their negativity toward the society in which they live. This negativity has to be neutralized if they want to win acceptance and liking of the society.

How to participate positively? Firstly, one can avoid the negative ways of interaction, such as complaining and blaming the society for one’s own shortcomings. This immigrants’ mentality, dubbed as “persecution complex,” will only make the society more negative in its reaction that will perpetuate the individual’s exclusion. Remember, the key issue here is the society’s suspicion of the Muslim’s loyalty, which translates as the need for patriotic behavior such as serving the army. Japanese Americans have been exemplary in showing positive approach. During World War 2, they were removed from homes and quarantined. While living in internment, they volunteered to fight for America. A whole battalion 100/443rd comprised exclusively of Japanese, won 21 medals of Honor and was one of the most decorated units. After the war, they reentered life. Although they were bitter but they vowed to show to others that they were better, and were successful in proving it. Other patriotic behaviors will be such as hoisting American flag. contributing money, time and skills strictly for the benefit of America would also be easily recognized as patriotic. Also helpful would be participation in supportive activities undertaken for the benefit of needy people and for the provision of medical relief of the American community

Dilemma of Muslim Participation

While what is needed and what is expected of Muslims in America is clear to Muslims, do words and music match? For the actual practice, we have to be motivated by a love for America. The reality of Muslims is the other way; they feel persecuted, resentful, humiliated and so on. Thus, how can they participate positively? Some suggestions, developed previously, should help with this dilemma.

Previous emphasis on group dynamics with multiple illustrations was given on purpose to develop an insight into its working and to crystallize the three basis thoughts for their constructive play in restructuring their thinking and a helpful role in overcoming the Muslims’ difficulty in positive participation. This is amplified in the following

1) Both Muslims and America are legitimate in feeling victimized. However, these feelings are currently being attributed wrongly to the “other group” as perpetrator, who is regarded as the main cause of the issue and needs to be held responsible and blamed for its exclusive and individual participation;

2) Instead, the feeling of being victimized should be attributed to the exaggerations and heightened emotionality triggered by the dynamics of the groups that take over rational thinking;

3) Muslims were mistreated by America because of her fears and her irrationality; but

also because Muslims acts were directed at security issues. To begin with, Muslims had been lacking in the needed demonstrations of their loyalty and then a Muslim group attacked America. America’s act for protection has to be seen as a natural reaction and should therefore be condoned and not condemned. Thus America was not the aggressor as it appears when taken in isolation. If these thoughts are allowed to restructure the Muslims mind, the blame on America would be minimized to reduce their resentment and anger towards America. Given a little of the negative feelings –if still left, Muslims should be persuaded to rise to the occasion and act positively, not only for the sake of their long-term benefits, but also for the reason of their love of Islam. God has created all the countries impartially and does not favor any one country as homeland for Muslims (See Iqbal- philosopher-poet). Potentially, therefore, America is just as good as Egypt, for instance, for Muslims to love. Love of soil is not only natural but is consistent with what Islam requires. (see Alwani in Akhtar, 2007). Moreover, our love of America should be heightened further when we appreciate high values of Islam and ask where else they are existent, live and well but in America.

Reconciling Islamic identity with American identity

New Identity. The identity we are searching for obviously is some kind of combination with an American identity. That raises two questions, we are combining an American Identity with what “other” identity, and in what proportions will they combine? The basic need for American identity arises for the newcomer to fit into the society. Therefore, the higher the degree of “American” component, the better it is. Ideally, it should be much greater than half. In a typical case, an immigrant likes to combine American with one’s ethnicity – the culture of origin. But this is often difficult to actualize. It is like saying, “Put on pajamas or shorts for sleeping.” The “or” suggests you can have either, but not both. That combination is impossible. In contrast, the American practice of wearing shorts is potentially combinable with the general precept ‘do not display your beauty to others’ (Islam). That means, a female can still wear shorts in her privacy, in the medical necessity, in the setting of females (may be). The point is “American specific” practices are more likely to combine with general rules of Islam than with practices of other cultures. Similarly, American precepts are still more likely to blend with Islamic counterparts. Several related observations follow:

a) American culture, being incompatible, is sure to drive a foreign culture out of business over a few years;
b) Islam, as we call it, if it is predominantly couched in specific ethnicity, will fare the same way;
c) A literalist- traditional view of Islam that takes Islam in specific forms would be similarly incompatible.

Fiqh and Ijthehad have to be the most essential tools to use to strip a practice of its specificity.

Basic concept of Islam

According to Islamic scholars such as Alwani (Akhtar, 2007) – the former Chair of Fiqh Council of ISNA, there are two kinds of Islam: universal and local, that need to be separated from each other. When you examine over a long span of time and across the varying conditions in different cultures and find that the “Islamic precept” stays the same, such as Zakat, it shows an invariant obligation and therefore is universal, otherwise it will be judged as local and changeable. There is agreement that Quran and Sunna are the basic sources and their interpretation should be made within the framework of a system.

There is agreement among scholars that Quranic verses concerning social dealings (Muamlats) – few as they are – constitute a category of what is considered changeable. To dovetail with it neatly, socio-public dealings are precisely the ones that are at the heart of identity issues. To put simply, Islam allows changes in the earlier version of dealings in favor of American emphases and the identity needs; it also gives us the necessary tools to change; the rest is up to us: when and how to change.

One more basic concept needs to be amplified in regard to the Universal Islam or principles which basically are abstractions and would defy human comprehension .For the purpose of human handling, God’s message is given in familiar and concrete forms. Ramadan (2004) is quite insightful and absolutely right when he observes

“Islam does not exist outside of culture”. Even universal Islam is found always enmeshed in concrete forms which will turn out invariably to have cultural specifics when one would take a cross-cultural perspective. It is only the general principle and not the cultural specifics that Muslims are universally bound to follow. Therefore we need to free a teaching from its accompanying specifics, which surrounded it even in the early culture, when Islam was in the process of getting established; practices of that time, being local, still need a further step and scrutiny to uncover the universal elements

Abstracting from the specifics is decoding, which is well recognized in Fiqh. It is designated as Decoding I (Saeed, 2006) when the act of abstraction is taken in the context of the Muslim culture of origin. When the same abstraction act is done for the new culture such as America, it is designated as Decoding II. Decoding at the two levels is what is demanded in the application of Islam and the adoption of American practices. To help with these clarifications, a few illustrations are given below.

Qur’an specifies two women or one man is needed as the witness. However, it must be seen as specific to the business setting to handle which women in Arabia were ill suited. Therefore, the universal principle abstracted from this will be that a woman’s witness is equal and not half to that of a man (Decoding I). Examine women in America in business and other settings, women’s performance as witness is seen at par with that of men (Decoding II). When the two match, the American principle- a woman as equal to a man - is judged to be similar to that of Islam, it is accepted and has green light for Muslims. The case of rejection and red light would be premarital sex, which is favored in America in principle and practice both, but is clearly prohibited in Islam (post-marital sex is complex, the principle is rejected yet the practice is prevalent in America). Islamic stance of rejection is the same for both; harmful effects of sex outside of marriage are substantiated by American researches (Akhtar, 2007, ch.6). The third case of yellow light could be women’s practice of sky diving in America, the principle behind it could be adventure and fun in public. May be Islam’s stance is neutral to this practice- assuming that it does not pose any harm to the public and women’s safety is not a big issue. A clear case would be to eat Bakhlawa or Apple Pie. A definite preference would be for Apple Pie in the identity perspective while Islam’s stance is neutral (The preference would remain clear if it is pitted against California dates, but may get a bit murky if Apple pie is pitted against dates especially brought from Mecca; yet the judgment should stay still intact in favor of Apple pie if the perspective is the normal eating favorite for American Muslims. As a general formula, the recommendation for the neutral cases will be to convert them into positives for the purpose of maximization of the acceptance zone for American practices. To sum up, the general rule is accept all the American practices with the exception of those against which there are clear prohibitions in Islam (Ramadan, 2004, Akhtar 2007). When we take the principles to their highest level to arrive at American ideals such as Liberty, Equality, Justice, they will all match100 %.with the ones in Islam. Perhaps, Abdou- an Egyptian reformer, understood Islam at its height as he observed it while abroad ,and upon return he said “ In the West I found Islam but no Muslims; in the Arab world I find Muslims but no Islam.”

American practices of public concern

In general all American practices – excepting those that are prohibited in Islam – should be accepted.

While living in America there is a pressure to be like other Americans. We should accept this and not insist on the use of our ethnic practices instead. American practices, however, vary in the degree of concern they carry with the American public, and therefore this should be reflected in the priority we assign to them. For example, if your youngster has to wear Nike shoes or he/she should go to school in your car, and not in the bus, it is reflecting the high concern of all kids in the school and should be accepted as such. In growing children, gaining group acceptance is important to facilitate their American identity and general psychological adjustment. We have leeway if we do not want to adopt some American ways. But we should not disregard ways, which are especially high in salience compared to others. As it may be evident from our previous discussion of identity, we need to respect the American flag and July 4th activities. The best proof of our loyalty in the current crisis is going to war for America. However, an American war that is against your own or another Muslim country would pose a dilemma. If America is fighting a war that is unjust, a Muslim should invoke the provision of Conscience as Mohammad Ali, the boxer, did. If it is a just war, Muslims have to join the U.S. armed forces notwithstanding some oppositional voices raised by misguided Muslims. Contrary to the confusion and ill-founded opinions on Islam, scholars uphold the principle of a contract even when it is against them. “If they ask you for your help in the name of religion, you must help them, except against people with whom you have concluded a treaty “( Qur ‘an 8:72).

Dar al Harb (home of war).

A basic reservation raised against America for considering it our home is that it is at war with Muslims. True, in the deep psychological sense, a home is where you have peace. But this technical categorization, not found in Qur’an or Sunnah but emerged in Fiqh, is either unclear or invalid. The usual condition emphasized for Dar al-Islam is where government machinery and system are Islamic, so that you do not have to struggle further. Ulemas have been debating this issue for a long time. There are three viewpoints (Masud 1995):

1) Those who maintain that it is a valid concept and hold on to its definition;

2) Those who find it valid but like to change the conditions to define Harb; and

3) Those that find the concept invalid and would drop it.

The argument is that in the present world, conditions are radically changed. Malawi (1997) re-conceptualizes the West as an abode of Treaty. Ramadan (1997) sees Europe and America as an abode of Dawa (bear witness to God in the country you live) and concludes that Muslims can make this abode their home definitely within Islamic framework. Especially when Muslims have 5 guaranteed rights in America : right to practice Islam, right to knowledge, right to establish organizations, right to autonomous representations, right to appeal to law. A person, even with little vision, can see the necessity of these rights to bring about and maintain one’s integrity as an individual: Physical - life, safety, health; Intellectual, Social- family and group activities, and as God-conscious missionary, who has the message of ‘real” Islam to deliver, adapted to the America’s needs and temperament, more by action than by preaching, and more by positive contribution to improve American life than by reactive anger and hostility towards America. That is being a true Muslim and having a true American identity. Which Muslim country provides the opportunities to achieve all that?

Strategic Action Plan

We Need Action with Urgency.

After working out a conceptual clarification regarding who we are and who we want to be, the question is how to move towards actualization of American identity. Typically, immigrants leave it to Nature to take its course to “Americanize” them. Generally, they are resistant because it involves changes that are disturbing. In our case it is by our choice; we must design our identity that suits us best and we must act to actualize it in an optimal time and without delay. We need an urgent action in view of the dangerous world we live in. We are aware of the current reality marred with antagonism between Muslims and America. This antagonism, as noted previously, is reciprocal and involves the two groups bringing the macro politics into play in each group. We are aware of the current reality marred with antagonism between Muslims and America, which is reciprocal and which involves the two groups at the macro level of politics in each group. If we have an insight into the multiplicative effect of these dynamics, we should expect the feeling of antagonism will escalate and might get out of hand if excesses are committed by either side. Before that happens, Muslims need to take an emergency action, especially regarding the issue of their loyalty and positive participation – at least to the point of changing the direction of negativity to neutrality. At that point, rationality will take over and business can go on at the normal pace.

If we start now with our positive participation, it will take years before it is widely known and becomes a positive part of the dynamics of the American culture. What happens to our children until then? They will grow in the shadow of terrorism, suspicion and fear, isolated and mistreated; that in turn will produce self- doubt, cause a problem of identity, and a feeling low self-esteem. Should these problems persist for an extended time, they could cause depression and anxiety. Malaise and de-motivation, known to characterize minority groups such as blacks, have been found to be responsible for their failings in several areas. Taylor (2002), who worked with minorities, arrived at an insightful conclusion: “Self esteem is the vaccine that inoculates” people and their children against disorders such as academic under-achievement, family dysfunction, substance misuse, violence, and delinquent behavior. Not having a direction is a problem is recognized as the usual identity problem; but beyond that, clarity itself is to be emphasized according to Taylor as a crucial need. Clarification of information is woefully missing, but what is further aggravating the identity problem is the Muslims feeling of hate and love of America, their divided thinking to go with Islam or without Islam, and finally their conflict on which Islam is real: Traditional, Enlightened, Salami and so on. What Muslims have is an identity crisis demanding their immediate attention. They have an urgency to sit down as a group and make some hard choices and start identity clarification before it is too late.

Group Action

Our strategy is to plan and design our identity and start to move right now rather than wait for clarifications to emerge over generations.

The first action needed is to decide how and who is going design the new identity? To get the ball rolling, it is proposed that identity should be designed by a council of experts, which carries credibility with the Muslim community. This Council should be divided in three committees comprised of three scholars each at a minimum. The Islamic Committee will have experts having an in-depth understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and who are familiar with the American-Western culture by way of birth or extended stay, The Social Science Committee would similarly have experts in social sciences such as Sociology, Psychology, and Economics, as needed The third committee would be American Culture Committee that may be split into two a) American experts recognized for their expertise at the national level ,b) Muslims recognized for their love of America combined with their heritage of being born American that goes back to 2-3 generations as American. The proposal is tentative and is open to discussions in the future involving community-wide participation. To make that happen and to carry this movement further to the level of educating, consensus-building on concepts, organizing the council of Experts and so on, we need activists, individuals and organizations working together. All the thinking and discussions are of little value unless we can translate them into action. Only action will bring the needed change and the desired benefit. To start, you have our humble action via this paper and organizational sponsorship by Muslim Council of America, which has organized an Islamic Committee that has already met by the date you would be reading this paper. We trust you will see sense in this movement and will feel the urgency for your action. As the Qu’ran says ‘collaborate as community in ( Bir and Taqwa’) the righteous cause’. As good Muslims, you will need to come forward for the survival of your community and take your own future and the identity of your children in your own hands, would n’t you?

References

Akhtar, M (2004) Predicting the degree of Americanization. A preliminary research report

Akhtar, M. (2007) Muslim Family in a Dilemma: Quest for a Western Identity. University Press Of America

Msud, M. (1995) Shatibi’s philosophy of Islamic Law.p.367. Islamabad: International Islamic University

Mawlawi (1987) Al-Usus Paris, UOIE

PEW (2007) Research Center Study

PEW (2006) Global Attitudes Project

. Ramadan, T (1997) To be a European Muslim. Oxford University press

Ramadan, T (2004) Western Muslims and the Future of Islam. New York: Oxford University Press

Saeed, A. (2006), Interpreting the Qu’ran. New York Rutledge

Taylor, D. (2002) The Quest for Identity: From Minority Groups to Generation. Greenwood Publishing

(Tariq Ramadan is a Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University. He is the son of Said Ramadn the grandson of Hassan al Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt. In 2004, Ramadan accepted the tenured position of Professor of Religion, at the University of Notre Dame in theUS. Since then he has struggled to get a visa to come to the US which was repeatedly denied by the State Department using Patriot act provisions. Several courts on representation by ACLU denied the appeal “. On July 17, 2009, the US federal appeals court reversed the ruling of the lower district court. On January 20, 2010, after more than five years of waiting, the State Department has decided, in a document signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to lift the ban from entering the United States. Ramadan is now in the US addressing various organizations.He is a creative contributor to the identity issues if Muslims in the West)

Tariq Ramadan is a better spokesman on behalf of Western Muslims than the herd of clergy and marginal scholars with which our culture is inundated. In the West, Islamic scholarship has become the study of the obvious The story is similar among the experts of Pakistan, Middle East and Afghanistan. Wawro calls one influential party of these experts as “sorcerer’s apprentice” and narrates how CIA director was hoodwinked, thanks to these experts, by a fake Mujaheddin camp in Islamabad (Quicksand-Penguin 2010). Having met his father in Karachi in the fifties I was curiously interested in listening to Ramadan in Georgetown University (4/12/10) which has become a bastion of the axiom enunciated by Gunnar Myrdal “we study the people we rule”. Unlike our many pseudo-experts, Ramadan is well-read, articulate in expression and vigilant of questioner’s traps. He is one of our “Wandering Derveshes” whose sincere desire to help our despondent nation does not embrace a viable solution. A problem may be what Keynes pointed out, “the difficulty lays not in the new ideas but in escaping from the old ones.” He constantly delves into Arabic terminology seeking to get a rabbit out of his hat. Absorbed in his eloquence and rhetoric the audience waits anxiously, mostly in vain. For me a pleasant surprise was that unlike many, Ramadan following the footsteps of his father still hangs on to his soul. I think he is sincere, otherwise a rare commodity.

Challenging the West:

Although he does not extract the panacea from the edifice of Islam, he does rather cleverly put the West on the spot challenging them to live up to their standards of democracy and free speech, example being the issue of Minarets in Switzerland or the ban on his entrance to the US- “ you cannot change your constitution to prevent a professor from coming to the US.”. Dealing with the West on their own turf is the strongest aspect of Ramadan’s scholarship . He provides a great service to the crying Muslims as well as to those Westerners who have the audacity to understand Muslims. He however does not fully meet the challenges offered by Western scholars driven mostly by their own interests.. These were somewhat raised by his host and stage colleague Dr. Esposito. Esposito wants the classic Islamic traditions to deal with modern challenges of ritualism, dogma and religious extremism particularly in politics. It was ironic to note in Esposito’s wish-list that he places the burden of dealing with oppressive regimes in the Muslim world on the victims of oppression themselves. It is to note that practically not a single oppressive regime exists without Western support. Mother of all oppressions is the group of money-laundering financial institutions in Switzerland, Lichtenstein and Cayman Island thoroughly protected by the West. Ramadan himself, espousing the Western value of “free speech”, complained that he has been banned from Egypt which to note, is a strongly affiliated ally of the US.

Ramadan is obviously influenced by Islam’s alkalam scholars and is quite suitable to present Islam’s fables to the world. He is as a whole quite well-versed in the knowledge of Islam’s non-scientific heritage and its tall human values. Like other scholars of Islam however, he suffers from a model deficit. In the last 200 years the only model that has the evidence of some success for Muslim reform is that of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan of British India. The only one. Ramadan does emphasize the importance of education, as did Khan, in his writings but presents eloquently in the form of sermons not measures. His urgings have the potential of panning out in a few hundred years. Like many in liberal arts, Ramadan needs to study Scientific Method a bit more carefully, a strong point of Sir Syed.. No one will give a hoot to Western philosophy and pretensions of values if there was not dramatic uplift of its society owing to scientific and technological development.

Muslims also have responsibility. Similar to other well-wishers of Islam Tariq does not land on the basic epistemic problems of Muslim communities. Why are they so immune to Islamic teachings? Why are their regimes so corrupt, so underdeveloped? Why are they so alienated from knowledge, scientific research and scholarship? Why do they by and large, hesitate to participate in Western academic institutions including those of science and knowledge?

What is not the basic problem of Muslims

Instead of addressing the problems of Muslim communities we press on selling Islam and the Prophet and often commit an over-kill. Ramadan himself, in his book on the Prophet, promises to modernize the tradition but fails to offer the methodology. It is to be realized that credibility of Islam as a viable source of a productive civilization is already established, not only by us but by others. It does not need our scholars’ help; thank you very much. Carlyle boldly recognized this in his Hero as a Prophet. He declared his admiration of our Prophet with a passionate championship of Muhammad as a Hegelian agent of reform, extolling his sincerity and commenting “how one man single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades.” No one did a better job than Harvard’s George Sarton in early 20th century, in establishing the glory of Muslim science. UNESCO published a whole treatise on Islamic Technology ( al-Hassan & Hill, 86). Anne Marie Schimmel has done excellent scholarly work in recent times presenting the achievements of Muslim civilization.. There are hundreds of others that are too many to mention here. The point is that establishing the glory of Islam or the nobility of Prophet is now a non-issue and spending time on it to explain the current malaise of Muslims is admission of scholarly ineptitude and lack of creative expression. It would not impress the people who have been brain-washed by the current failure of Muslim communities to develop themselves and to achieve a dignified living. Not one of more than 50 countries, some richer than many in the world is considered a developed country by modern standards. This failure is not because Muslims are not impressed with Islam and the Prophet. Ramadan is also unnecessarily defensive. It is encouraging that Ramadan wants to interact with the West in a meaningful way and more than anyone the US provides ample opportunity to do so. Americans are unique in being advanced, educated, professional and more than any other factor, by and large fair and generous. They want to improve the standards of others including Muslims. They want to teach and help us for whom they have the patience and resources. Muslims have not taken full advantage of this opportunity that has revolutionized Europe and lately China and India. Our scholars, particularly those who have refused to educate themselves or who have avoided hard subjects to specialize in the US, can make a difference by being changing their habits.

In The Box

Ramadan is knowledgeable and has acquired the skills of logic necessary to present a case or scenario in favor of the Muslims. He just needs to get out of the box in which all of our scholars are currently trapped. While we need to participate and do so fully in Western institutions we need to present our case in our own framework of interests. With more economic resources than any other community on their hand, why do Muslim nations not have a sophisticated system of research grants and endowment for Muslim causes, for scholars? Presently, sporadic Muslim philanthropy serves the interests of others including those of intelligence agencies often through Muslim hands lacking scholarship or sincerity or both.. May I suggest we study the like of system of NIH, not only to learn genuine grantsmanship but to know the subject at hand?

Integration

There are genuine and multifarious reasons for the lack of Muslim integration into indigenous cultures that need to be scientifically not emotionally analyzed and understood. Some need to be alleviated. There is a reason although not justification that American Indians and Blacks could not integrate and Jews partially could in the American culture. Muslims are not the first to struggle against barriers of integration. But we need to understand the society we live in, participate in the debates and discussions actively and not allow our incompetents to represent us.

In a discussion in Washington Post recently led by David Waters on the subject of Rev. Graham’s crusade against Islam where he called Islam an “evil and wicked religion”, I wrote the following piece published in the Post.(5/5/10). I present this as an example of the activity and argument our entire nation needs to present to indicate the obstacles in our efforts to integrate with the American society

“In all major religions there have been wicked people exploiting their religion for their own interests. Surely Mr. Graham knows about Martin Luther’s movement against them. Hitler wrote “I am doing God’s work”; so was the work of Milosevic in the massacre of Bosnian Muslims and others in the massacre of Sabra and Shattila. Does it take less than a wicked man to abuse choir boys? We can all pick our bones of hatred from the morass of humanity. I suggest Graham read Carlyle and Sarton. Not a single oppressive Muslim country exists on its own without the sponsorship of the Western Christians and not a single Western bank including those of Switzerland and Cayman Island exists without Muslim money. The chaos in Muslim lands is mostly because of the economic strife the West creates everyday. “

In all fairness, Ramadan advocates integration but again offers no model. There certainly are shortcomings in Muslim attitude that discourages integration. The role of religious leaders is an important factor. Most of these leaders are not educated in the US, have little local experience or background to assess the needs of the community and are mostly addressing the issues that facilitate the matters of their bread and butter. They do not personally participate in American institutions; most are not capable. It is in their material interests to discourage integration. The problems with the Muslim scholars have already been discussed above. The Muslim community would also be better off if it gives up on receiving any genuine help from Muslim countries. Their inferiority complex persuades them to appease the noise makers and opportunists.

These questions primarily focused on three issues:

(1) Is Allah, the God of Muslims, different from the God of Jews and Christians?
(2) Did Islam bring any special message that was not covered by Judaism and Christianity?
(3) What will happen to those people who never heard or accepted the message of Islam?

Being the guest of a very gracious host, I initially felt uncomfortable in responding to these questions lest my answers might offend them. But when I noted a sincere desire on their part to acquire a better understanding of these issues, I decided to answer their questions candidly. I would like to share my responses here, in the hope that the readers will find them interesting and informative.

Introductory Remarks: I first mentioned that nearly 600 years after Jesus, the Arabian Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) re-established monotheism in its purest form. Muhammad (PBUH) taught that God does not favor any tribe or nation; rather He loves all of humanity equally. In no uncertain terms the Prophet (PBUH) denounced the discrimination against any man or woman on the basis of race, color or social status. Unfortunately, contemporary Muslims place so much emphasis on ritualistic and doctrinal issues that the Qur’anic teachings concerning social justice and basic human rights have been eclipsed. Even Western scholars of Islam point out that the Qur’an teaches a just and ethically based social order that eliminates the exploitation of the poor and the weak and firmly establishes the equality of all human beings. In his famous book, The Religions of Man (1965), Huston Smith stated, “In a society driven with class distinction, the new Prophet [Muhammad] was preaching a message intensely democratic, insisting that in the sight of Lord all men are equal.”

Generally Western people are familiar with the five pillars of Islam. What they do not know is that the main purpose of these rituals and practices is to achieve taqwa [piety and righteousness]. All our deeds and actions, according to the Qur’an, should be performed only for God’s sake, “Say: Surely, my worship and my sacrifice and my living and my dying are for God, the Lord of the worlds.” (6:162) The Qur’an repeatedly emphasizes that taqwa should be the primary motivating force behind all our endeavors. The Arabic word taqwa comes from the root “wqy” which means “to guard and protect against”. This implies that one should ward off or guard against evil and always keep in mind that God sees our actions and knows our thoughts. The Qur’an clearly states, “The noblest of you in the sight of God is the one most possessed of taqwa [piety and righteousness].” (49:13)

Q. Is Allah, the God of Muslims, different from the God of Jews and Christians?

A. The Arabic word Allah is a contraction of two words: the article al and the word ilah. It is worth special mention that this word Allah, which sounds so alien to the Western world, was used with a slight variation in both Hebrew and Aramaic long before Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). People tend to forget that the three monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) originated in the Middle East. In the Old Testament the word Elohim is used quite often for God. And when Jesus in extreme pain and agony cried out for God, he used the word Eli (Mathew 27:46) or Eloi (Mark 15:34). Probably the origin of Elohim, Eloi, Eli, or ilah can be found in a root common to the family of Semitic languages. Therefore, it is not surprising that Qur’an clearly affirms that Muslims believe in the Biblical prophets and their messages: “Say (O Muslims): We believe in God and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob and the tribes and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that given to other prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.” (2:136; cf. 3:84) Addressing to Jews and Christians, the Qur’an declares, “… Our God and your God is the same One God. And it is to Him we surrender.” (29:46)

Q. Did Islam bring any special message that was not covered by Judaism and Christianity?

A. Judaism and Christianity preached monotheism, but Islam further purified the concept and also affirmed a universal concept of God. Muslims believe that the doctrine of the ‘Trinity’ caused Christians to move one step away from the first Commandment revealed to Moses. The Qur’an clearly states that there is only one God and He alone should be worshipped. Also the Qur’an begins with a universal concept of God: “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds.” (1:1). By stating that God is Lord of the worlds, a universal concept of God is established at the very beginning. He is not the God of Israel, the Arabs, and the Aryans or of any particular tribe or nation. Rather He is the God of all people – a universal God. Thus He has neither chosen nor given special favor to any tribe or nation. In fact, belief in one universal God is the “Ultimate Truth” that gives meaning and purpose to life. Only when this “Truth” sinks deep into the individual’s psyche, is one free from all types of bondage, including the worship of people who sometimes behave like “gods” because of their wealth, power, knowledge, or influence.

During the first seven years of the Prophet’s mission in Makkah, most Qur’anic verses fervently denounced social injustice, fraud, exploitation of the poor and mad craze for worldly goods and riches. Karen Armstrong, a renowned scholar of monotheistic religions, in her book Islam (2000) stated, “Social justice was, therefore, the crucial virtue of Islam.” The Prophet (PBUH) preached universal brotherhood, aiming at the creation of an ideal society where all people, regardless of race, color, or social status were treated equally. He evidently practiced what he preached. Just imagine in 620 C.E., Muhammad (PBUH) was preaching social justice, human rights, and vehemently denouncing discrimination of people based on race, color, social, and economic status. In his famous Farewell Pilgrimage address, the Prophet (PBUH) reminded his followers that, “… an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; nor does a white person has superiority over a black person, nor does a black person has superiority over a white person. Verily the noblest among you is he who is most pious.”

Against overwhelming odds, Muhammad (PBUH) achieved astonishing success in changing the religious and social realities of his people during his life time. No wonder historians have been baffled by the visionary side of Prophet, the universal aspect of his religion, his genius for handling complex problems, and his immense power to capture people’s minds and hearts. In less than two decades, the solitary and persecuted preacher of Makkah firmly established Islam and set in motion one of the most memorable revolutions that would change the course of world history.

Q. What will happen to those people who never heard or accepted the message of Islam?

A. This question is not confined to Islam only; it applies to Judaism and Christianity too. Jews believe they are God’s chosen people. Christians believe that Christ, not God, will be the Judge on the Day of Judgment and that salvation is impossible if one does not accept Jesus as one’s savior. But in Islam, only God is the Master of the Day of Judgment and salvation depends primarily on good deeds, “Every soul is a pledge for its own deeds.” (74:38) As for what will happen to those who did not hear or accept the message of Islam, the answer is that God, who is just, will judge them fairly on the Day of Judgment: “Those who believe (Muslims) and those who are Jews, Christians and Sabaeans - whosoever has faith in God and the Last Day and does wholesome deeds, they have their reward with their Lord, and there is no fear upon them, nor shall they grieve.” (2:62). The Qur’an never ceases to emphasize that individuals are responsible only for their own acts and deeds, “That was a people that hath passed away. They shall reap the fruits of what they did, and ye of what ye do! You shall not be called upon to answer for what they did.” (2:134; cf. 2:141)

A January 2010 Gallup poll found that almost half of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Islam. About the same number of Americans harbor personal prejudice toward Muslims, according to the poll. These numbers become especially troubling when we consider that two-thirds of the Americans polled admit to knowing little to nothing about Islam. The image of American Muslims is in serious disrepair. And so is the image of Muslims and Islam all over the globe.

Introspection on the part of us Muslims and Muslim governments is largely missing and necessary in the continuing debate about Islam and Muslims that has become the focus of the global media and community.

Why are others distrustful of a religion and people they know very little about and what can Muslims do about the rising tide of Islamophobia? The call to make the world a better place is inherent in the core message of the Qur’an which is the foundation of Islamic belief and practice. But why have efforts to change the world by Muslims so often recently been failing or have gone tragically awry? And how might Muslims in the 21st century live in ways that have integrity with their traditions and are more truly transformative? What kind of history — or, perhaps better put, story or narrative — of Islam are we offering? Can we properly define Islam in isolation from explicit consideration of its encounters and intertwining with non-Muslim cultures?

Christian and Jewish cultures are highly successful because they have transitioned from the state of being “God-fearing” religions to being “God-loving” religions. Fear dominates the culture of most Muslim societies. Manipulative use of Qur’anic verses — teaching of Qur’an mainly from the perspective of fearing God — thus psychologically establishing a paradigm of negative authority, disallowing the more important aspects of God leading to positive involvement in humanity. Mullahs and Imams are tapping into fear in hopes of creating obedience and morality. Too often their sermons or khutbahs tell us, “Repent, repent, repent! The Day of Judgment can happen any moment! Allah is always watching!” Apart from these notions that prevent the Muslim masses from progressing an even worse message that is being pounded into the consciousness of the masses from the pulpit is that there is a global conspiracy against Islam and Muslims.

All too often political theologies worsen the very problems they are designed to solve. For the past two centuries the trend in the Muslim world has been that of a politics fueled by resentment and a sense of victimization, actuated by a strong will to power, and a propensity to demonize its opponents. Our historical experience to this day remains strongly authoritarian, patriarchal and pre-modern, legitimized by “exclusivist “rhetoric and thinking. That Muslim societies in general have radicalized over the last decades cannot be denied. Completing the confusion and disarray within Muslims is the issue of competing narratives and visions of Islam among Muslims which has created deep fractures and polarizations that have through out Islam’s history provided fertile ground for various forms of ideological extremism and violence against each other besides making them vulnerable to exploitation and attack from others.

Our religious institutions are in irreversible decline. The obsession with personal piety and “How-is-it-with-me?” spirituality that permeates most congregations is undiluted narcissism that creates for us a sense of feeling good and yet doing nothing. Our willingness to question our belief systems and personal self-image is hardly apparent as culture. Rather than giving the entire blame for our decay to outside factors which have so dominated the Muslims during the last two centuries an honest analysis of our culture and our capacity to influence it is needed. By remaining as silent spectators we are allowing the attacks from outside and confusion and turmoil from within to devastate our societies, create permanent fissures in our relations with other communities and with each other. The unsustainable ideological path that we are treading presently is leading us nowhere and causing grave injury to the true spirit of the Qur’an’s message. The Qur’an’s most important feature is not only what it actually says but what Muslims say about it. The great truth which Christians have acknowledged since the Reformation — that a revelation can come from God and still be misunderstood by the one who receives it is apt for consideration by Muslims. Educated Muslims increasingly are recognizing that their faith needs to adapt. The challenge is to revitalize the Muslim masses by strengthening their confidence in their own ability to engage the Qur’an constructively.

What is really needed is a different paradigm of engagement within us and also with the rest of the world. A structural or social change within our societies must be achieved by internal discourse and negotiation which will allow the necessary change to take place in accordance with the history and culture Education not indoctrination is crucial. A total overhaul of the educational system and institutions is badly needed. In many Muslim countries because of failure of economic growth, education has suffered. This allows for easy exploitation of the youth in Muslim countries. It is through proper education of our endangered future generations that we can eradicate the menace of “mullarchy” that inculcates in the minds of our youth to blow themselves up in suicide missions and advocates violence in the name of our faith. Building a strong educational framework and institutions which incorporate the shared values with others and which upholds human dignity and mutual respect is the critical task. This challenge to the Muslims is as old as the message of the Qur’an — if only they would recognize.

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) was a German philosopher of the late 19th century who challenged the foundations of Christianity and traditional morality. “The Last Man,” Nietzsche feared, would engage in the worst kinds of provincialism, believing he had nothing to learn from history. “The Last Man” would wallow and revel in his ignorance and quest for personal fulfillment. He would be satisfied with everything that he had done and become, and would seek to become nothing more. He would be intellectually and morally stagnant, incapable of growth, and become part of an easily manipulated herd. “The Last Man” would mistake cynicism for knowledge — though he did not have the Muslims in mind, we should think about this.

The author is chairman of Islamic Information Service, US. He can be contacted at nazir.khaja@gmail

Afterword By Dr. Aminah McCloud

The dilemmas that confront American Muslim citizens regarding political participation — identity, the if an how of participation, and the ability to influence American political and social life successfully, are not new dilemmas for religious or ethnic communities. Struggles over the meanings of secularism, libertarianism and the implications for morality, values and public conduct are also old American history. Various religious communities’ approaches to political participation give us a few facets to explore. For example, the Amish and to a certain degree the Mennonites and Quakers seek to opt out of the political arena. this enables them to keep their distinctive religious and ethnic identities and perhaps even more sharply defines those identities. Unfortunately, the choice of non-participation subjects these communities to the vagaries resulting from the political and social choices of the larger community.

At the other end of the continuum sit the Christian Right and the Jewish communities. Though their impetuses for participation in the political arena arise from different spaces, both communities use their religious understandings as guidance in the arena. For the Christian Right, the United States is a Christian nation with an unparalleled Constitution that while permitting and protecting religious liberty and the rights of the individual have lost its way. Members of the various communities under the umbrella of the Christian Right assert that it is our efforts to uphold liberty and freedom that propel society toward a secularism that values only the material world and is without a moral consciousness. Members of this community seek to ignore the racial, ethnic and religious divides of the nation and assert a political platform that stands on Christian moral principles. The decade of the 90’s has been a decade of success for this community. They have brought their platform to the attention of the nation and made their issues — the issues to which Americans must respond.

The Jewish community, seeks to protect itself from a seemingly endless legacy of ethnic/religious persecution. This community marshals it energies and considerable wealth to protect Jewish interests at home and abroad. Toward these ends, the Jewish community has elected officials at all levels of government, established an overwhelmingly successful series of political lobbies and large, vigilant watchdog organizations.

Unlike other minority communities such Amish, Mennonite, Mormon or Quaker communities, American Muslim citizens are not homogenous regarding race or national origins. Unlike Jews, Muslims do not have a legacy of ethnic/religious persecution that could force some cohesion of needs and unity of action at the political level. Certainly unlike the Christian Right, Muslims are not representatives of any aspect of majority religion. Media malattention to Islam and Muslims, American governmental inaction in the face of genocide against Muslims overseas, and increasing antipathy for Islam and Muslims at home as a result dictate the need for political participation.

Inside of each American Muslim community — African American and immigrant, there is a divergence of opinion on political participation whether the concern is domestic or foreign. The best recent example began with the Gulf War and the dilemma is best described in an article by Robert Dannin, “Understanding the Multi-Ethnic Dilemma of African- American Muslims.” in 1990, the Muslim World League and the World Supreme Council of Masajid sought to “create worldwide consensus in favor of the Saudi-American military coalition against Iraq.” In the U.S., these organizations offered material assistance to a convention of both African American and immigrant imams. In the African American Muslim community, the only obvious supporters of the offensive were the communities under Imam Warithudeen Muhammad. Most other Sunni Muslims, representing the majority, as well as the Nation of Islam, was opposed. both groups used their news organs to publicize their opinions and tried to influence the general public stance. While many immigrant organizations were also publicly opposed to the war, there was little cooperation with African American communities.

The African American Muslim community is visibly and substantially divided “over issues of national allegiance, ethnic identity, and religious orthodoxy.” The immigrant American Muslim community is more obliquely though just as substantially divided over ethnic identity, national origins and multiple allegiances. For both communities however, there must be a reconciling or at least an appropriate interpretation of Islamic legal sources in order to understand the limits or extent of their political participation. But this is not the end of the complexity.

Many African American Muslims are not familiar with the various discourses on political participation in non-Muslim lands in the four accepted schools of legal thought. In this matter Professor Jackson’s article is both timely and critical. He presents the divergences and convergences of the scholars regarding the political possibilities for Muslims living as minorities in non-Muslim lands. That there is more than one opinion is news for many. Whether this information will be used by leaders of communities or if it will be used at all is something only time will reveal. Nonetheless, the claims against political participation using assertions that this what Islamic law demands are considerably weakened. Interestingly, the only legal school that is against any manner of political participation is also against Muslims living under non-Muslim rule and demands that they move to Muslim lands.

Equally, many immigrant Muslims are unfamiliar with the range of legal opinions on political participation. More interesting though is the fact that many of the immigrant Muslims who oppose political participation come from countries where the legal school sanctions their immigration. Professor Mazrui addresses aspects of this issue. For some immigrants, American citizenship has not compromised allegiance to country of origin and if there is to be any political participation it should be focused on foreign policy. Unable to influence the politics of the Muslim homeland from within, has led many immigrants to form help organizations here in the U.S. The relative freedoms in the U.S. have provided the space for distant action.

African American Muslims though active in the various causes focused on Muslims in the Muslim world have not been able until recent incidents of domestic discrimination to interest immigrants in domestic issues — poverty in the inner cities, social reform, school reform, etc. Older Muslim organizations such as The Islamic Society of North America and The American Muslim Council have only very recently been forced to turn their attention to recording and challenging situations of prejudice in the workplace and the public space. The Council on American-Islamic Relations is the first organization specifically founded as a watchdog group to monitor the media and assist Muslims in asserting their rights as citizens to live and work without harassment.

I think that one question both articles lead the reader to is — what exactly do we mean by political participation. Obviously all American citizens pay taxes, which support public schools, support military excursions, and support a particular worldview that embraces all of the wonders and limitations of a largely Protestant Christian secular society. All immigrants must pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States to become citizens. This uncontested support is political. All citizens participate whether they do so enthusiastically or not in obeying the laws of the land. Is this what we mean by “political participation?” Both of these scholars assert that the major issues in the American Muslim community are those which reflect on the dilemmas of identity.

The Muslim community is just beginning the deliberations that many religious communities have had in previous decades. It is beginning discussions with issues of identity. Whether the religious affiliation or the national identity is the primary identity is of course the first question. For African Americans, the American experience, political or social is one filled with deceptions, hatreds and challenges. For immigrant Muslim Americans, the American experience has largely been a dream fulfilled but with moral compromise. Members of both groups have the same set of Islamic values and understandings of moral conduct in the public space. Both have the understanding that politics in America is not an issue of morals and values rather it is a system that responds to money and clout. Muslims observe the political clout of other minority communities such as the Jews and tend to hold this community as the model but without the needed knowledge and reflection on the social conditions that permit this situation.

Professor Mazrui contends that the Muslim community is a “Tale of Two Islams.” The immigrant community has material resources but no experience while the African American community has a wealth of experience but little in the way of material resources. The former group is “Islamized but not fully Americanized” while the latter community is a “fully Americanized but not always fully Islamized.” I would say that neither community is fully anything. Colonialism and slavery compromise the Islam brought by the immigrant community and persistent discriminations dilute the Americanism represented by African Americans. Both groups, like other diasporic communities do have to live in a kind of limbo with multiple allegiances and identities. But before the community can coalesce into a block of significant votes or a significant voice there is another set of concerns with which it will have to engage.

Muslims put God, community, family and other interpersonal relationships at the top of the list. A web of obligations in Islam supports this worldview. Muslims have to look further than single issues, be more demanding of those in politics for explanations of positions, and most importantly decide for themselves what is important. Following the agenda of others is not the way politics is done in the United States. Political power emerges from collective action. For Muslims this means coming together about what matters to Muslims. There are religious offices in Washington and Muslims, in order to do more than survive, must begin to vigilantly monitor the government’s policy-making process just as the Protestant churches, Jews and Catholics for them.

Some Muslims will continue to debate the legitimacy of political participation forever. For those who see the necessity of this participation, a better way to expend energy is in strategies for effective advocacy. While the end product of effective advocacy may depend on favorable circumstances, leadership and increase outside antipathy toward the community, the movement toward thinking about strategies is a must. American history is one of grassroots movements than mobilize the masses. There are enough social issues to coalesce a movement around. Muslims should see themselves as capable of providing a clear voice in the face of chaos. Other religious communities have used a variety of techniques such as television and radio ministries to generate millions of letters. Muslims must build and create viable relationships with social organizations and become visible members of the larger social community. Muslims must envision themselves as having the potential to shape public opinion on issues.

The community must generate skilled national leaders who can gain and keep access to the government. Good leaders have strategic minds. They can develop attainable goals that are clearly articulated. They need to understand the nature of coalitions and the art of compromise. Islam obligates Muslims in civic responsibility and this very fact should be the starting point.