The UN reports that 108 people were killed in the massacre. In particular, it was the brutal murder of 49 children and 34 women that outraged the world. One could not have expected the barbarism and savagery to reach levels this ruthless. Gunmen attacked the most vulnerable people to terrorize the population, attacking them at close range and sparing no one.

11-year old Ali El-Sayed's family was exterminated before him. He survived to tell the story by pretending to be dead, being soaked in the blood of his six year old brother, while gunmen went on their murderous rampage. His is just one of thousands of unimaginable horror stories; most of which we will never get to hear. Some media outlets went as far as publishing images of corpses of the dead children, with hopes of 'shocking us' as one editor explained. With the world falling deaf to the screams of Syrian victims, perhaps such measures are necessary to wake us all up.

It is perhaps to the credit of these journalists that international reaction to the massacre was swift and loud. Syrian diplomats have since been expelled from numerous Western nations including the US, UK and Canada. The UN Security Council unanimously condemned the Syrian government; China and Russia agreeing on a resolution to the conflict for the first time. Even Syria's long time supporters felt embarrassed standing by the tyrannical regime for once. Though, both nations continue to oppose tougher sanctions against Syria.

The world has expressed its disgust with the atrocious crime that took place. But will Bahar al-Assad face any repercussions? Robert Fisk thinks he will get away. Assad got away with Deraa and Homs; and he will get away with Houla too. Fisk argues that the Middle-East is littered with a hundred Houlas with 'their dead children piled among the statistics, with knives and ropes as well as guns among the murder weapons'. It was Bashar's Uncle Rafat's Special Forces that carried out the massacre of insurgents in Hama in 1982. Today, the he lives between London and Paris – what is to say Assad would be in any different a position?

The Future of Syria

Everyone agrees that something needs to be done about the worsening situation in Syria; what exactly, no body's sure. The UN special convoy's peace plan brokered by Kofi Annan in March has ended in catastrophic failure with none of its conditions being met. It echoes the failure of similar plans in Bosnia and Rwanda; it has actually given political cover to a regime that continues its brutality without fail. As Philip Gourevitch explains, Annan's plan 'is another soap bubble, and the U.N. military observers who are supposed to monitor it are useless—or worse: when the butchery began in Houla, the regime told the U.N. monitors to stay away, which they did, bringing back bad memories, from the mid-nineties, of the false promises of protection that were extended, under the U.N. flag, to the people of Bosnia and Rwanda before they were abandoned to their killers'.

Congressman Keith Ellison too feels the UN peace plan has failed. He called for the international community to establish a 'safe zone' in Turkey that would protect fleeing Syrians; even if it means having to proceed without support from China and Russia. This safe zone will be protected by military forces, including those of the US, and would strike back if faced with regression from Syrian forces. The UN Security Council can play a much stronger role but its arms are paralyzed by Russian and China. Vladimir Putin's minster stated that there would be no mingling with Syria's internal affairs and that any military intervention would be premature.

Washington Post called for a stronger US leadership in mitigating the conflict. They too called for establishment of safe zones along or inside Syria's border – which are to be guarded with the help of Turkish forces. So far the States has acted like a helpless player and has continued to pin the blame on Russia and China. With two on going conflicts in the Middle-East and an upcoming presidential election, a US led military intervention is unlikely. Nor is there any reason to assume they would be welcomed by the Arabs or hailed as liberators if any positive outcome ensues. A situation like that in Afghanistan is more likely to immerge in the case of such an intervention.

Turkey, along with Arab allies, who have a more favourable position in the region need to step up and play a more active role in stabilizing the conflict. Instead of waiting for the West to play its political and bureaucratic games, it is time for them take on leadership of that region and answer the call of the Syrian people. These initiatives need to be backed by Western powers and supported by any means possible. It is unlikely that such an initiative will take place, but it is one that would be likely welcomed.

The savagery demonstrated in Houla Massacre sends the message that nothing is off limits, nothing is sacred and nothing remains inviolable. It is this type of ruthlessness and disregard for divinely ordained sanctity that every tyrant has an eventual downfall. It will not be long before Bashar Assad will be humiliated and ousted – the question is how and when. Let us hope that those in power can learn from history and prevent catastrophes of the past from reoccurring. For the rest of us, dua is our main weapon. Please keep the people of Syria in your prayers.

 Leenat Jilani is going into her fourth year of University majoring in Political Science, Social Justice and Peace Studies at a Western University in Canada – Brescia University College. As a young leader, Leenat has represented Canada on an international trade and development mission to Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and now the Y20 Summit. Leenat would like to thank Al-Maghrib Institute for supporting her trips and promoting female leadership.

Recalling my time at the Y20 Summit, Mexico, as a Hijaby (head-scarf wearing Muslim woman) I can confidently say that I felt like I met the world in four days: about 200 youth leaders from 25 different countries across the globe. It was a great honor to represent my country, Canada. I love my country and our promise of a multicultural mosaic was evident in every fiber of our team.

I like to bring back the memories to reflect a spiritual meaning behind the journey. The youth I met at the summit are going to be the world leaders of tomorrow. Yet, for a lot of these youth they were meeting a Hijaby for the very first time. Most males had no idea of the interaction etiquette with a Muslim woman that wears a head scarf, leave aside what she thinks. I was asked questions out regarding the Hijab like “did your dad make you wear that?” or “how do you people get married if you can't even hug the guy beforehand?” to mention a few.

Some of us Muslims think that one should never go to the places or put themselves into a situation that may become uncomfortable or inappropriate for a Hijaby woman to be a leader. But for me it was those moments that demanded the greatest need of my presence. Hijabys cannot just run away from the leadership positions or places that might put us in uncomfortable situations. We must face them with dignity and assert our identity as Muslim leaders. If we don't do it as Muslims then we might as well not exist and regional to global decisions will never reflect our perspective.

After a long conversation with a delegate from a country in Europe, explaining why I wear the Hijab and why I believe I feel it frees me, the importance of this conversation hit me. With political aspirations in mind, this well intentioned youth who had many misunderstandings of the position of the women in Islam could have become an advocate of many misconstrued ideas that would attempt to “liberate” women that look like me. Clearly there is a great communication gap.

Being one of the two Hijaby's at the Y20 Summit I quickly became a specimen of fascination. Since Latin America has very little exposure to Muslims and Islamic culture; I quickly became the favorite of the guards who wanted to take pictures with me. I would have had the most random people ask for a “Foto?” and with no ability to speak Spanish I would nod, smile and pose. I believe it took a mere couple of hours for the whole conference to know that I was from Canada. People would express their surprise as they confirmed the information to be true. My perfect English and position as Rapporteur for my working group were the proof that I was the most eligible to represent my country.

It is also important to mention that every person I met was simply wonderful. I did not feel weird or left out wearing the Hijab. Delegates from all countries were gracious, kind, welcoming and open. All the men were more understanding polite whom I told not to hug or kiss for it not being the Muslim way. As some of us are told that wearing hijab will hamper your success, to that I say bi'iznillah – Allāh will never let you down.

If some of you are still wondering what the Y20 Summit is, let me first explain it in reference to the G20. The Group of Twenty or G20 is the premier forum for international cooperation on the most important aspects of the international economic and financial agenda. Recently it has expanded to include more topics affected by the global economic system such as Green Growth and Food Security.  It brings together the world's major advanced and emerging economies. The Y20 then brings together youth leaders from the G20 countries to discuss the same issues and produce a document that will be taken into consideration by the G20 leaders as the global youth voice.

On May 13, 2012, a video of a shameful sermon by Pastor Charles L. Worley of Providence Road Baptist Church surfaced and went viral. Worley's words oozed with paternalism as he flamboyantly declared, “I'm gonna preach the hell out of them.” The “them” in this case is “lesbians, gays and queers,” whom Worley suggested should be rounded up and placed in “150 mile long fences.” He preached that since this segment of our population can't reproduce, eventually the issue will be solved. What makes this story so scary is not that Pastor Worley expressed his beliefs on the topic, nor even that he suggests a “150 mile fence” within which all the “lesbians” should be housed and the second fenced area for the “gays and queers.” It is that he is hiding behind his congregation as criticism builds and that they are supporting him! Of course, to Worley's credit he did state that we should drop food into these areas from time to time by “airlift.”

Now I might be going to go out on a limb here, but I have to say that advocating for even the most “nutritional” of concentration camps is disgusting, repulsive and intrinsically un-American. That said, we American Muslims find ourselves in difficult position. We are a civil rights community, one that has also faced calls for internment, and are also a group whose faith categorically rejects homosexual activity as immoral. Long before this sermon, activists from our community have been attempting to reconcile this very issue. It seems that the choices available were either to ignore our faith's teaching, attempt to reinterpret our theology, or ignore/reject the efforts and outreach from the LGBT communities.

I believe there is a way to stand against discrimination and remain true to our faith on this issue. To get there, let's explore who “we” are, the public debate on gay marriage and what might be a just role for our collective voice.

As individuals who happen to be “Muslim,” we can choose to advocate for any cause, but if anyone expects the American Muslim community to collectively advocate on an issue, it should be sound with regards to a majority of Islamic thought, scholarly rulings and, of course, something that is constitutional. Muslims are not a racial group or a group whose identities are based on our collective sexuality. Therefore, our communal voice should speak to primarily to issues of religious liberty and be presented as coming from a community of faith.

It should also be recognized that communities of faith rarely can collectively agree on specific issues; therefore, we should not be expected to advocate for another community's cause simply because we may be seen as having a similar or even the same opponents. Principled leadership does not indulge quid pro quo or expect it.

With regard to the public debate, good examples of what to avoid are abundant in the pastor's video clip. For instance, Worley displays an obvious need to subjugate others to his standards. His terrible rhetoric is another great example because it will only serve to make people who believe that marriage is an institution ordained by God to be seen as a hateful. Deconstructing this view is important as it holds marriage as the base of society because the intention and function of a marriage goes beyond the committed couple's relationship itself but extends to the possibility raising a family from the offspring of the couple. The defining of marriage is where all sides of the debate feel “limited” by their opposition.

The public conversation tends to either degenerate into conflict or be framed in several incomplete ways like: marriage is a purely legal issue, or America has both freedom of and freedom from religion. A rarely considered angle is that either side is actually imposing their values on the other. By calling marriage a “civil right,” proponents of gay marriage are engaging in the tyranny of the minority. Similarly, by telling two adults that their relationship cannot be sanctioned by a willing religious body or by the government, opponents of gay marriage are limiting the freedoms of conscience, choice and will of a minority population, not to mention that they are also limiting their ability to receive equal treatment before the law.

I emphasize with the “tyranny of the minority” line of thought, not because the LGBT community is pursuing equal protections, benefits and legal rights. In fact, from the LGBT stance, the demand to use the exact same terminology for what are in fact different types of committed relationships makes sense. The logic is that unless the term “marriage” is used for everyone, true equality cannot be had. However, those that advance this line of thinking are missing the point of view that many people of faith hold. Without indulging the slippery slope arguments, moral traditionalists at a minimum see this tactic as trying to impose a foreign and offensive moral standard on them. Simply put, the exact opposite of the pursuit of equality, but instead the use of law and civics to legislate moral relativity and even religious doctrine.

I believe that as American Muslims our duty to others is to advocate for equal legal rights, benefits and protections for all groups of people. This means standing against violence, intimidation, subjugation, oppression and of course the internment of people because of their “classification.”

The tricky thing with gay marriage is that it is a real intersection of religion and government in that marriage is both a state matter and a matter of faith.

American Muslims should understand that due to our nation's religious freedom, any legally recognized “faith” community can decide what they want to define as a “marriage” according to their moral code or lack thereof. This is important as there are already theologians from many well established faith communities that have or are in the process of accepting gay marriage as acceptable to their creed. Because America's system of law functions to protect those that need protection AND to set standards the challenge for American Muslims, it is one of balance.

The real issue that should concern us as a community of faith is the idea of moral equivalency. Moral equivalency is at the root of the previously mentioned “tyranny of the minority” concept. A primary reason for the push and insistence on the term “marriage” is that proponents of gay marriage ultimately do want their relationships to be considered morally equal to a “traditional” marriage or what the vast majority of Muslims believe to be decreed by God. Simply, put just like Pastor Worley, it is not enough to agree to disagree.

In my mind, the best position as a people of faith is to leave the gay marriage issue to the states so that the each state's population can have the best chance of advocating for the policy that they desire. The federal government should buffer this stance by mandating that regardless of what is decided by an individual state's voters that each state must provide an option that requires LGBT communities who are not afforded a “marriage” still receive the same legal rights and benefits as other committed relationships. This means that in some states the LGBT community would have to settle for a title like a “civil union” and in others they will have a “marriage.” In short, while might does not equal right, demographics do matter.

Some moral conservatives argue that because all states are supposed to recognize marriages of other states that this position is too weak. Yet, morality in a society founded on pluralism is not something that can be legislated. However that does not mean that we should advocate for or even stay silent on what we consider immoral. People of faith's proper role in America is do the work that our faiths call us to, namely to spread our beliefs in the free market of ideas.

In closing, I want emphasize that group or identity politics and coalitions should NOT lead us to quid pro quo support for a cause. If our participation in social justice movements has led us to think in terms of coalition building at the cost of our own principles then that is unacceptable.

]]> http://muslimmatters.org/2012/05/30/gay-marriage-internment-camps-and-moral-equivalency/feed/ 97 http://muslimmatters.org/2012/05/28/an-icon-became-a-student-how-i-joined-muslimmatters/ http://muslimmatters.org/2012/05/28/an-icon-became-a-student-how-i-joined-muslimmatters/#comments Mon, 28 May 2012 06:35:07 +0000 Ruth Nasrullah http://muslimmatters.org/?p=36667 By Ruth Nasrullah

When I became a blogger I did not know what a blog was.

I only knew that it involved writing in a public forum, which was something I wanted to do.  I had completed a masters degree in Journalism in December 2003, moved to Houston and went mostly nowhere as a writer.  The idea of writing whatever I wanted whenever I wanted to a worldwide audience (it being the internet and all) was golden.

I became a blogger at the pleasure of the Houston Chronicle.  In November 2006 my blog, The Straight Path, became one of only three religion blogs on the paper's website.  My first few posts recounted my conversion to Islam and my impressions of life as an American Muslim convert.

I learned quickly what distinguishes a blog from a column: the readers.  Many readers welcomed me, but some of the comments on my very first post included anti-Islam and anti-religion comments so vitriolic that I had to ban readers almost immediately:

I really do want to know the basics. I hear that muslim men get virgins when they die. Where do the virgins come from? This is a serious question. Thanks.

In the other corner was fellow Houstonian Amad Shaikh, who became a regular and supportive reader. I had known Br. Amad since 2004, when we worked together on CAIR-Houston's media committee.  I learned much of what I know about blogging by studying Br. Amad's blog, Musings of a Muslim Mind, as well as his comments on others' blogs. He rarely pulled punches.  He was analytical.  He was energetic and active, and as a smart blogger he linked to other blogs and websites far and wide.

One blog he linked to was mine, and he commented on it with a sentence I'll never forget:

Sister Ruth Nasrullah, who is fast becoming a Houston icons [sic] for converts to Islam, is now hosting her own blog via Houston Chronicle.

My husband and I had a good laugh over the idea that I was an icon, but I appreciated Br. Amad's support.

A few months later he invited me to join a new group blog he was forming. I did, and I remember from the start being confused by much of the emailed discussion among the initial group.  I felt kind of lost and uninformed and right away a bit of an outsider, feeling that I wasn't as “conservative” as the rest of the team.

But I wasn't invited to MuslimMatters for my religious knowledge; I brought to the blog what I brought to the Chronicle: a subjective recounting of an American convert's world view, mostly unfiltered and all heartfelt.  In return, my co-bloggers and readers introduced me to a viewpoint that powerfully influenced me at a time when I was still developing my understanding of the deen.

From 2008 to 2011 I took a hiatus from the blog while running Light of Islam, a nonprofit educational center and bookstore in Webster, TX. In that new venture I was challenged by the responsibility of selecting inventory.  Should I only order books whose content I agreed with?  That begged the question of how I even came to my understanding of Islam.

I had relied for guidance in large part on my fellow MuslimMatters bloggers and readers.  In exposing visitors at Light of Islam to different perspectives, I also exposed myself to alternative viewpoints.

My approach to Islam continues to evolve, and wherever my life as a Muslim leads me, the influence of my interaction with Br. Amad, Sh. Yasir, Br. Omar, Sr. Anonymouse, Br. Ahmad, and Br. Musa was inestimable.

The Houston Chronicle gave me the opportunity to bring my experience of Islam to their predominantly non-Muslim readership, and Br. Amad gave me the opportunity to bring it to the MuslimMatters audience.  I learned much from both blogs, and I hope I did justice to his vision; now that my hiatus is over I hope that I will do so once again in future posts.

There were seven founders, but MuslimMatters was Br. Amad's vision and I am astounded by how it has grown, māshā'Allāh.  I feel some shame for not having been there during its growth and development, but I hope I can redeem myself by regularly blogging again and by reclaiming the niche I once owned.

May Allāh reward everyone involved with MuslimMatters and may it continue to grow from the simple group blog it was to an influential part of the blogosphere and a dynamic public representative of Muslim thought.  May its readers always develop a beneficial understanding of traditional Islam and how it is practiced in today's world.  That includes me.

Rajab is the seventh month in the Islāmic lunar calendar. This month was regarded as one of the sacred months (Al-Ashhur-al-hurum) in which battles were prohibited in the days of the Holy Prophet. It is also a prelude to the month of Ramaḍān, because Ramaḍān follows it after the intervening month of Sha'bān. Therefore, when the Holy Prophet sighted the moon of Rajab, he used to pray to Allāh in the following words:

“O Allāh, make the months of Rajab and Sha'bān blessed for us, and let us reach the month of Ramaḍān (i.e. prolong our life up to Ramaḍān, so that we may benefit from its merits and blessings).”

Yet no specific way of worship has been prescribed by the Sharī'ah in this month. However, some people have invented some special rituals or practices in this month, which are not supported by reliable resources of the Sharī'ah or are based on some unauthentic traditions. We would like to explain here the correct position about them.

1. Celebration of Lailatul Mi'raj

It is generally believed that the great event of Mi'raj (ascension of the Holy Prophet to the heavens) took place in the night of 27th of Rajab. Therefore, some people celebrate the night as “Lailatul- Mi'raj” (the night of ascension to heavens).

Indeed, the event of Mi'raj was one of the most remarkable episodes in the life of our beloved Holy Prophet. He was called by Almighty Allāh. He traveled from Makkah to Baitul-Maqdis and from there he ascended the heavens through the miraculous power of Allāh. He was honored with a direct contact with his Creator at a place where even the angels had no access. This was the unique honor conferred by Allāh to the Holy Prophet  alone. It was the climax of the spiritual progress which is not attained by anybody except him. No doubt the night in which he was blessed with this unparalleled honor was one of the greatest nights in the history of this world.

But, Islām has its own principles with regard to the historic and religious events. Its approach about observing festivals and celebrating days and nights is totally different from the approach of other religions. The Holy Qurʾān  and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet  did not prescribe any festival or any celebration to commemorate an event from the past, however remarkable it might have been. Instead, Islām has prescribed two annual celebrations only. One is 'Īd al-Fiṭr and the other is 'Īd al-Aḍḥa. Both of these festivals have been fixed at a date on which the Muslims accomplish a great 'ibādah (worship) every year. 'Īd al-Fiṭr has been prescribed after the fasts of Ramaḍān, while Eid-ul-Adha has been fixed when the Muslims perform the Hajj annually. None of these two 'Īd's is designed to commemorate a particular event of the past which has happened in these dates. This approach is indicative of the fact that the real occasion for a happy celebration is the day in which the celebrators themselves have accomplished remarkable work through their own active effort. As for the accomplishments of our ancestors, their commemoration should not be restricted to a particular day or night. Instead, their accomplishments must be remembered every day in the practical life by observing their teachings and following the great examples they have set for us.

Keeping this principle in view, the following points should be remembered with regard to the “Lailatul-Mi'raj”:

(1) We cannot say with absolute certainty in which night the great event of Mi'raj took place. Although some traditions relate this event to 27th night of the month of Rajab, yet there are other traditions that suggest other dates. Al-Zurqani, the famous biographer of the Holy Prophet  has referred to five different views in this respect: Rabī' al-Awwal, Rabī' al-Thāni, Rajab, Ramaḍān and Shawwāl. Later, while discussing different traditions, he has added a sixth opinion, that the Mi'raj took place in the month of Dhu'l-Ḥijjah.

Allama Abdulhaq Muhaddith Dehlawi, the well-known scholar of the Indian subcontinent, has written a detailed book on the merits of Islāmic months. While discussing the 'Lailatul-Mi'raj' has mentioned that most of the scholars are of the view that the event of Mi'raj took place in the month of Ramaḍān or in Rabī' al-Awwal.

(2) It is also not known in which year the event of Mi'raj took place. The books of history suggest a wide range between the fifth-year and the twelfth year after the Holy Prophet was entrusted with prophethood.

Now, if it is assumed that the event of Mi'raj took place in the fifth year of his prophethood, it will mean that the Holy Prophet remained in this world for eighteen years after this event. Even if it is presumed that the Mi'raj took place in the twelfth year of his prophethood, his remaining life-time after this event would be eleven years. Throughout this long period, which may range between eleven years and eighteen years, the Holy Prophet  never celebrated the event of Mi'raj, nor did he give any instruction about it. No one can prove that the Holy Prophet ever performed some specific modes of worship in a night calling it the 'Lailatul-Mi'raj' or advised his followers to commemorate the event in a particular manner.

(3) After the demise of the Holy Prophet also, no one of his companions is reported to celebrate this night as a night of special acts of worship. They were the true devotees of the Holy Prophet and had devoted their lives to preserve every minute detail of the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet and other Islāmic teachings. Still, they did not celebrate the event of Mi'raj in a particular night in a particular way.

All these points go a long way to prove that the celebration of the 27th night of Rajab, being the Lailatul-Mi'raj has no basis in the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet or in the practice of his noble companions. Had it been a commendable practice to celebrate this night, the exact date of this event would have been preserved accurately by the Ummah and the Holy Prophet and his blessed companions would have given specific directions for it.

Therefore, it is not a Sunnah to celebrate the Lailatul-Mi'raj. We cannot declare any practice as a Sunnah unless it is established through authentic sources that the Holy Prophet or is noble Companions have recognized it as such, otherwise it may become a bid'ah about which the Holy Prophet has observed in the following words: “Whoever invents something in our religion which is not a part of it, it is to be rejected.”

Being mindful of this serious warning, we should appreciate that the 27th night of the month of Rajab is not like 'Lailatul-qadr' or 'Lailatul-bara'ah' for which special merits have been mentioned expressly either in the Holy Qurʾān  or by the Holy Prophet .

However, all the recognized modes of 'ibādah (worship) like salāt, recitation of the Holy Qurʾān , dhikr, etc. are commendable any time, especially in the late hours of night, and obviously the 27th night of Rajab is not an exception. Therefore, if someone performs any recognized 'ibādah in this night from this point of view nothing can stop him from doing so, and he will be entitled to the thawab (reward allocated for that recognized 'ibādah insha-Allāh.) But it is not permissible to believe that performing 'ibādah in this night is more meritorious or carries more thawab like 'Lailatul-qadr' or 'Lailatul-bara'ah', because this belief is not based on any authentic verse or on a Sunnah of the Holy Prophet. Similarly, it is not a correct practice to celebrate this night collectively and to invite people to special ritual congregations.

(4) Some people suggest some special modes of worship to be performed in this night. Since no special mode of worship is prescribed by the Sharī'ah in this night, these suggestions are devoid of any authority and should not be acted upon.

It is believed by some that the Muslims should keep fast on 27th of Rajab. Although there are some traditions attributing special merits to the fast of this day yet the scholars of ḥadīth have held these traditions as very weak and unauthentic reports, which cannot be sufficient to establish a rule of Sharī'ah. On the contrary, there is an authentic report that Sayyidna 'Umar, raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, used to forbid people from fasting on this day, rather to compel them to eat if they had started fasting.

It should be borne in mind here that a “nafl” fast can be observed any day (except the six prohibited days of the year); therefore, fasting on 27th of Rajab is not prohibited in itself. What is prohibited is the belief that fasting on this day is more meritorious than fasting in other normal days. One should not fast in this day with this belief. But if someone fasts therein, believing it to be a normal nafl fast, there is no bar against it.

Sacrifice (qurbani) in the Month of Rajab

In the days of ignorance (jahiliyyah) the Arabs used to offer the sacrifice of a goat in the month of Rajab. This sacrifice used to be called “Atirah' or 'Rajabiyyah'. This sacrifice was offered in the name of different so-called gods and their icons. In the beginning of Islām, this custom was retained, but the Muslims modified it by offering the sacrifice of 'Atirah in the name of Allāh instead of the false gods. But finally, this custom was abandoned and the Holy Prophet prohibited the offering of 'Atirah. In a tradition of Sayyidna Abu Hurayrah , raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, reported by both al-Bukhāri and Muslim, the Holy Prophet has said: “Fara' is nothing and 'Atirah is nothing.”

Abu Hurayrah , raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, has explained in the same tradition that 'Fara” was the first child of a she-camel. Whenever a she-camel delivered its first child, the Arabs used to sacrifice it in the name of their so-called gods, while the 'Atirah' was a goat used to be sacrificed in the month of Rajab. Since the Holy Prophet stopped both these customs, 'Atirah is no longer a recognized practice.

'Umrah in the Month of Rajab

Ibn 'Abidin, the well-known scholar of the Islāmic jurisprudence, has mentioned that the people of Makkah (in his days) used to perform 'umrah in the month of Rajab. Perhaps they believed that performing 'umrah in this month is more meritorious than in other months. Then Ibn Abidin himself has rejected the authenticity of this practice, because no tradition of the Holy Prophet is found to this effect. Conversely Sayyidah 'Aishah, radyAllāhu anha, has expressly negated the presumption by saying that the Holy Prophet  never performed an 'umrah in the month of Rajab (Sahih Muslim 1:409)

However, Ibn 'Aibidin has quoted a narration that 'Abdullah ibn Zubair, raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, completed the renovation of Ka'bah shortly before 27th of Rajab, and as a sign of gratefulness he performed 'umrah and slaughtered some animals. But this report cannot form the basis of a recognized annual practice, firstly because the report is not very authentic, and secondly because it does not mention that Abdullah ibn Zubair, raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, had adopted it as a continuing practice. At the most, he performed 'umrah once as a sign of gratefulness on the completion of Ka'bah. It does not mean that he performed it as a characteristic of the month of Rajab. Therefore, performing 'Umrah in this month is like performing it in any other month and no special merit can be attached to it merely because it has been performed in the month of Rajab.

The Ṣalāt of “Ragha'ib”

Another special mode of worship attributed by some people to this month is the Ṣalāt of Raghai'b. According to the custom of such people, this Ṣalāt is performed in the night of first Friday of the month of Eajab. The Ṣalāt of Raghaib is said to consist of twelve rak'ats to be performed in pairs with six salams, and in each rak'at the surah al-qadr is recited three times followed by the Surah-al-ikhlas. This type of Ṣalāt is also not based on any sound source of Sharī'ah. Therefore, almost all the jurists and scholars of Sharī'ah have held that the Ṣalāt of Raghaib is a baseless practice and it is not permissible to treat it as a recognized practice of this month. It is true that there is a tradition, narrated by Razin, the author of a book of ḥadīth, which attributes the origin of this practice to the Holy Prophet  but almost all the scholars of the science of ḥadīth have held it to be absolutely unauthentic. Therefore, no importance can be attached to it.

Distribution of Breads

Another baseless practice in the month of Rajab is that the people bake special types of breads and, after reciting some verses and prayers on them, distribute them among their friends and neighbors. This custom has two different shapes.

1). In some communities, this custom is celebrated on 17th of Rajab on the assumption that Sayyidna Ali, raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, was born on 11th of Rajab and the 17th of Rajab is the day on which his 'Aqiqa (Shaving of his head) was performed. In order to celebrate this happy event, the breads of some special type are prepared and after reciting Surah Al-Mulk on them, they are distributed among the relatives and friends. These breads are generally called “breads of Tabarak” because Surah Al-Mulk is usually recited on them.

This practice is baseless because it is never proved that Sayyidna Ali, raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, was born on 11th of Rajab or that his Aqiqa was performed on 17th of this month and, as explained earlier, even if these events are proved to have happened in those days, their commemoration through these specific rituals is not warranted by the Sharī'ah.

2). A more common practice of this type is observed on 22nd of Rajab whereby some breads and meals of a special type are prepared and distributed among the people. Since these special meals are usually placed in some bowls made of clay, the custom is usually known as “Koonda”, an Urdu equivalent of such bowls. It is usually believed that the custom is designed to make 'isal-al-thawab to the soul of Sayyidna Jafar Al-Sadiq who himself has directed his followers to observe this custom and has promised them that whoever observes it, his desires will be fulfilled.

All these assumptions also have no basis at all, neither historically, nor according to the principles of Sharī'ah. In fact, the date of 22nd of Rajab has no concern whatsoever with Sayyidna Jafar al-Sadiq, Rahimah-u-Allāh. According to the historians, he was born on 8th of Ramaḍān 80 A.H. and died in Shawwāl 148 A.H. No specific event of the life of Sayyidna Jafar al-Sadiq is proved to have happened on this date. The people believing in the custom refer to a coined story mentioned in an unauthentic book named “Dastaan-e-Ajeeb”.

Briefly stated, the gist of the story is that a poor woodcutter lived in Madīnah in the days of Jafar Al-Sadiq. He went abroad to earn his livelihood. His wife was employed in the house of the Prime Minister. Once she was cleaning the courtyard of the Prime Minister when Sayyidna Jafar al-Sadiq passed by her. It was 22nd of Rajab. He advised her to bake some breads of a special type and make 'isal-al-sawab to him. According to this story, he promised her that if her desire is not fulfilled after this practice, she can catch hold of him at the doom's day. On hearing this, the woman made a vow that if her husband will come back with a considerable wealth, she will observe the custom of “Koonda”. On the same day her husband, who was in another country, found a valuable treasure in the earth and came back with it to Madīnah where he established himself as a rich man and started living in a magnificent castle. When his wife told the story to the wife of the Prime Minister, she disbelieved her and because of this disbelief, she and her husband, the Prime Minister, were punished by Allāh. He was removed by the king from the prime minister-ship and was imprisoned in a jail and was ordered to be hanged. While being in the prison, the wife of the Prime Minister remembered that she had disbelieved the story of Jafar al-Sadiq told to her by her maidservant and their misery might be the punishment of their disbelief. On this point, she and her husband repented before Allāh and made a vow to observe the custom of “Koonda”, if they are released from the jail. After they made such a vow, the whole scenario of the events changed suddenly. The king released the Prime Minister from the jail and reinstated him on his former position.

As it can be seen by any reasonable person, this story is totally forged on the face of it. The person who has coined this story did not even know that Madīnah had never a king nor a Prime Minister. All the Muslim rulers were named as caliphs and had no Prime Minister at all. In the days of Umayyads, their capital was Damascus and in the days of Abbasids, their permanent seat was in Baghdad.

It is ironical that the story of such a woodcutter is not even known to anybody in Madīnah, nor in any city of the Arab countries. No Arabic book has ever referred to it. It has no mention except in an Urdu book 'Dastaan-e-Ajeeb', the author of which is unknown. One can easily see that a custom based on such a fallacious and mythical story can never be an Islāmic custom. Islām has always been far away from such superstitions.

Therefore, this baseless custom should completely be avoided by the true Muslims. Some historians have opined that in fact, this custom has been coined by some Shi'ites because the date of 22nd of Rajab is the date of the demise of Sayyidna Mu'awiyah whom they take as their biggest enemy. They took that date as a happy occasion and made the Sunni Muslims also to celebrate it on the pretext of the above mentioned story.

Be that as it may, it is evident that such customs have crept into the Muslim society by their long association with Hindus who commemorate different historical events of their religion in the like manner. The Muslims must be careful about these customs, because they are not only an invention of ignorance but also the imitation of non-Muslims in their religious rituals. No doubt the “'isal-al-thawab' to the soul of a deceased Muslim, and particularly to a pious person is not only permissible but also a commendable practice but the Sharī'ah has not prescribed a particular date, nor a particular mode to do so. If someone wants to make “'isal-al-thawab” to Sayyidna 'Ali, raḍyAllāhu 'anhu, or to Ja'far al-Sadiq, he can do it any day and by performing any act of worship, like Ṣalāt, fast, Sadaqah, dhikr etc. There is no reason why it should be restricted to a special type of meal or bread distributed on a particular date. What makes this practice worse is the fact that the people accustomed to this practice deem it as necessary as a fard (obligation); rather they treat it as more necessary than fard because they do not care to perform the obligatory Ṣalāt or to fulfill the rights of men obligated on them, but they are very strict and punctual to perform these activities. Moreover, if a person does not observe this practice, they reproach him and call him with bad names. Such behavior makes this custom a bid'ah which is condemned by the Holy Prophet  as a misguidance. Therefore, the Muslims must abandon all such practices and should not cling to it only because it has been the practice of their society for many years. A Muslim is supposed to follow the dictates of Sharī'ah and not the practice of the society, if it violates any of its principles.

Conclusion

The upshot of the above discussion is that the Sharī'ah has not prescribed any specific way to observe the month of Rajab or to perform a specific mode of worship or a ritual in any one of its dates. However, being a prologue to the month of Ramaḍān, it should be availed of for preparing oneself for Ramaḍān and one should pray Allāh to make him reach the blessed month and to benefit from its unique merits.

Click here to see all of Haleh's videos on MM

Today's Episode:  Gratitude Part 1/2

Part 1  |  Part 2  |  Part 3

Islamic finance over the last three decades or so has grown into a huge industry. It is huge both in the sense that vast sums of money are handled by Islamic finance, and also in the sense that a great many scholars have been attracted to it, and they have helped to invent or justify financial instruments which claim to make it lawful for Muslims to do things with their money very similar to the things that non-Muslims do with theirs. Yet, if using the word 'Islamic' before 'finance' is to mean anything at all, it should mean the kind of finance that belongs in Islam, the kind that Muslims acting specifically as Muslims engage in when they are producing and exchanging goods and services, and generally building up their individual and collective means of livelihood.

Most ordinary Muslims are, I think rightly, suspicious and cautious about accepting the permissibility of many of these instruments. It does not help matters that banks and investment companies run by and for non-Muslims are happy to use these same Islamic financial instruments because it helps them to attract and keep Muslim customers.

That sounds very similar to, for example, a supermarket stocking halal meat in the hope of attracting the business of the Muslims in its neighborhood. It is indeed similar, but it is not the same. There are known and clear procedures that must be followed before meat is called halal, and perhaps it does not matter that, at the final point of sale, the retailer is a non-Muslim – provided those procedures have been correctly and fully observed. It is not at all so clear-cut with money. Money is something abstract and symbolic as well as real and concrete. It is not just a store and physical sign of value; it is also a means of assigning and exchanging the values of different goods and services. Accordingly, it permeates all human relationships that are connected in any way to the exchange of goods and services.

That is why it matters very much to Muslims to know that the money that is circulating among and around them is, from an Islamic point of view, sound and safe, and that the transactions being done with that money are also sound and safe. The scholars engaged in developing, and justifying, Islamic financial instruments are engaged in the effort to provide Muslims with the assurance that those instruments are sound and safe from an Islamic point of view.

In order to judge whether and how far those scholars have succeeded in achieving this goal, it is necessary to step back and ask how we can know if a practice is sound from an Islamic point of view. Before we can do that we need to take a further step back and ask whether and how far such a task is possible at all. In other words, before I get into a discussion of particular instruments and contracts now being offered as Islamic finance, I want to establish as clear a framework as possible for this discussion. This is a necessary prelude to reaching a balanced judgment about these instruments and contracts based on a sufficient appreciation of the external necessities and the internal assumptions and arguments (some persuasive, some not) which have led Muslim scholars to seek out some sort of Islamic rationale for various modern financing techniques.

The world as we find it has in it three distinct orders that overlap and interpenetrate. The largest order encompasses all creatures, living and non-living, human and non-human, Muslims and non-Muslims, all together. We can call it “the natural order”. It is perceptible and intelligible to human beings; to some extent they can work out how it operates and, in some measure, influence and control what happens around them. This order includes the boundaries of time and space, and what modernists in the West call the laws of nature, to which everyone and everything is subject, involuntarily. Within that natural order, there is “the religious order” of divine commands communicated to human beings through God's prophets and messengers. This order is addressed specifically to human will, and demands a conscious, consenting, voluntary obedience. Finally, there is “the Islamic order” of divine instructions that bind specifically Muslims, commanding or commending them, through the Book and the teachings of God's Messenger to live in certain ways and to avoid certain other ways.

Because these three orders exist together in the one same world, it is sometimes the case that the approval of a certain way of acting as Islamic, as conforming to the Book and Sunnah, does not at all contradict its being approved by non-Muslims as “practical' or “useful” or “sensible” or “healthy” for the individual or for society. Non-Muslims just like Muslims get hungry and need food; get ill and need medical attention; get attacked and need to fight; get curious and need to explore and travel. Then, if Muslims find notably effective ways of serving these needs, we cannot be surprised if non-Muslims adopt those ways. That is obvious. It is also obvious that the converse applies: to serve their basic wants and needs, Muslims can in principle adopt ways that are or were the ways of non-Muslims. That is surely true. But it is also true to say that, in some instances, no matter how “useful' or “efficient” certain means are for the achievement of certain ends, Muslims as Muslims will reject them as unIslamic. How do they decide when they may and when they may not adopt the ways of non-Muslims? This is not an easy question. For the time being, let us note that if we are going to refuse certain financial instruments or transactions as unIslamic, we cannot do so simply on the basis that they are of “Western” or non-Islamic origin. We must have a better reason than that.

When we try to implement the rules and norms that constitute the Islamic order, we are not exempt from the conditions that obtain in the natural order. Accordingly, those Islamic rules and norms must be implemented with a measure of flexibility. For example, in a situation of necessity, where Muslims have no freedom of action or choice, what is normally prohibited is considered lawful for the duration of the necessity. This indulgence is intended to be temporary, exceptional. It is conditional on Muslims not desiring that which is normally prohibited. The only reliable proof that Muslims are not desiring what is normally prohibited to them is that they are striving to remove themselves from the situation in which they have no freedom of action to a situation where they do have such freedom. So, even if we are forced to adopt novel kinds of financial instruments or transactions on the basis that Muslims are so powerless in the world that they have no choice but to submit to the global financial order, there is, nevertheless, no compulsion whatever to legitimize such instruments or transactions by calling them “Islamic finance”.

All humans in the normal state of things have a measure of freedom of action. What distinguishes Muslims as Muslims is that, in the normal state of things, they strive to use that freedom of action in obedience to the will of God insofar as that is known to them through the teachings of Islam. To the extent that they consciously strive to do that, their lives fulfill the purpose for which the Book tells us they were created, namely to worship God. For believing, practicing Muslims, the natural order of this world, its being perceptible, intelligible, useful, beautiful, etc., is the wide space, provided by the Creator, within which human freedom of will and action are experienced as a reality. If the natural order were not as reliable as it is, freedom of will would not be experienced as real. But the natural order is there, real and reliable. That is why human life in this world can function as an enabling test, a test through which Muslims learn to perfect their obedience to God's will and so earn the promised recompense hereafter. Thus, we should expect from Islamic finance and the financial instruments it invents or justifies that they help Muslims to (at least) avoid doing what God has prohibited, and (ideally) help them to do more easily and conveniently what God has permitted. This is not a matter of clever word games, clever labeling. Surely Muslims will not accept as permissible the kinds of transaction they had long believed to be prohibited, even if Islamic economists find clever ways to label them as permissible.

But, you will ask, how are things known to be permitted or prohibited; how do they get entered into one or the other category? The answer is that we find out by referring to Islamic teachings on the matter in question. But then we must ask: how do Islamic teachings decide the matter in question?

In answering that, people often confuse two things – they confuse the authoritative sources of Islamic teachings, the Qur'an and Sunnah, with the rulings derived from those sources by Muslim scholars. The confusion leads to very serious difficulties for Muslims if, in principle or in practice, they accord to the derived rulings the authority of the primary sources. For reasons that will become clear later, I will use for the derived rulings the term “doctrines”. For the teachings in the primary sources, I will use the term “guidance”. Now, we can and do refer to the doctrines that constitute the Islamic legal and cultural tradition that we have inherited. We study and respect those doctrines; we learn from them; if we don't know any better (and 99.9 per cent of the time we really don't know any better), we follow them to the best of our ability in our circumstances. But the promised recompense hereafter for obedience to God's will does not depend on our following the derived doctrines; it depends for sure on our following the guidance in the primary sources. Of course, for most of us most of the time, because of our deficiencies in 'ilm and taqwa, in our knowledge and wariness of God, following the doctrines is the best way we know of following the guidance.

Abu Bakrah ath-Thaqafi (may Allāh be pleased with him) reported – The Prophet said “If two Muslims meet each other with their swords, then both the killer and the killed will be in the Hell-fire.” I said, “O Allāh's Messenger, that is the case for the killer but why should that be the case for the killed?” He answered, “Because he wanted to kill his companion.” [Al-Bukhari & Muslim]

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allāh have mercy on him), in his explanation of this hadith says that the condition of the sentence “When two Muslims meet with their swords” does not exclusively refer to a sword; the term applies to any weapon with which two Muslims intend to cause harm, leading to death for the other. Any weapon such as, a sword, rifle, rock, etc. that is used intentionally to cause damage to another Muslim is prohibited in Islam. The reference to two Muslims spells out the nature of the meeting – they both have the intention to do harm to one another. If any Muslims meet with a method by which they can kill, and one of them is successful in killing the other, then both, the killer and the killed shall be in the Hell-fire.

Abu Bakrah (may Allāh be pleased with him) said to the Prophet , “This is the killer” This type of statement, the repetition of the announcement as a fact, is known in the field of discussion as an agreement to what was said. Allāh says,

“Whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, he shall abide therein forever. The wrath and the curse of Allāh shall be upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him” [93, Al-Nisa'a].

This makes it clear why the killer shall be in Hell, but what about the one killed?

Upon Abu Bakrah's questioning about the killed, the Prophet said, “He was eager to kill his companion” This shows that even though he was killed, this individual will abide in Hell because of his intention and actions. The result, his failure and subsequent death, does not absolve him of the sin. Intention alone, however, is not the only determining factor. The fact that this man brought a means — a weapon, to fulfill his intention is what sealed his fate in Hell. His bringing a weapon shows that he was, “eager to kill his companion.” Success and failure are insignificant because both men are destined for the Hellfire.

This hadith proves that actions are according to their intentions, and that when this man intended to kill his companion, it was as if he actually did kill him.  There is, however, a stark difference between these men and martyrs. The Prophet stated, “Whoever is killed protecting himself is a martyr, whoever is killed protecting his family is a martyr, and whoever is killed protecting his wealth is a martyr, [and whoever is killed protecting his deen is a martyr]” [Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi]

One who is being attacked and acts in self-defense is not the aggressor; therefore if in the course of defending himself, a man kills an aggressor he is no punished for the act. The Prophet stated that one who comes to take another's wealth by force, “If you kill him then he shall be in the Fire, and if he kills you then you are a martyr” [Muslim]

The person who is defending his wealth, family, self and honor is only warding off an aggressor, one who is not repelled except by fighting (him off). If he kills the aggressor, the aggressor shall be in the Fire, and if he is killed in self-defense then he shall be a martyr in Paradise.

There is proof of the graveness of killing in this hadith it is from the reasons of entering Hell, we seek refuge with Allāh. There is also proof in this that the companions (may Allāh be pleased with them) used to mention (any) lack of clarity (regarding a matter) to the Prophet , and he used to answer them. That is why we do not find anything from the Qur'ān and Sunnah that really contains any lack of clarity, except that the answer to it is known.  Either the answer is known through the Qur'ān and Sunnah without having any questions being brought up (by the companions), or through having a question brought up (by the companions) which is answered (by the Prophet ).

Another example of that is when the Prophet foretold about the Dajjal (Antichrist) and that, He shall stay on earth for forty days, the first day (shall be) like a year, the second day (shall be) like a month, the third day (shall be) like a week, and the rest of the days (shall be) like our days. The companions asked him, “O Messenger of Allāh, that day which is like a year (in length), would it be sufficient if we only offered (during it) the prayers of a single day?” The Prophet said, “No, [but rather] estimate the times [for prayer]” [Ṣahīh Muslim]

In this there is the clearest proof and praise, that there is nothing in the Qur'ān and Sunnah which is not clear and does not have an answer.  It is the lack of understanding that leads to the inability to know the answer, or the unwillingness of a person to seek (knowledge), nor ponder, nor review (knowledge); this is what keeps the matter unclear to him.

-  Why am I blogging?

-  I have a lot on my mind. I have too many things to accomplish. I don't have forever.

I wanted to write about USA politics, a departure from the old days of “politics=haram”. But, I was still very much into the Muslim conflict politics. So, my focus was raising the “orthodox voice” or at the time “not-salafi but salafi voice” because the blogosphere was dominated by what I preferred to call, “pro-regressives”, a term that may have been coined by the illustrious, in-your-face, “Dr. M”.

My personal blogging journey quickly introduced me to some of the more popular Muslim bloggers of the time, Tariq Nelson and Umar Lee. I struggled to figure out what end of the “manhaj spectrum” they sat on, because it wasn't quite obvious from their postings. Soon I was talking to both of them offline and extending the blogging relationship beyond. As a fan of their work, and also (to be honest) to expand my own reader-base, I joined their “niche” to some extent.  I also discovered (hard not to) “Mujahideen-ryder”, the salafi-turned-sufi-turned-soup bro, and I still remember having my first 100+ comments post arguing about something as petty as what was a better Islamic conference: RIS or TDC. This was also the time when Imam Hamza Yusuf was slowly becoming palatable to me… it took a little while longer before I first found courage to promote his work.

Not long after I started blogging, I realized that many of my firmly-held, deeply-set religious beliefs had a hard time standing up to public scrutiny. It is one thing to believe what you believe in the safety of your own mind and home, but it is another to take it public and let the people test you for it. So, blogging became a positive experience for me. From arguing for hate, I started learning how to discuss how to love. From enmity to brotherhood. From manhaj-wars to wars for the good.

I remember checking my blog's stats every day – one hundred to two hundred hits. I had set blogspot settings to receive an email for each comment, and each comment was a small victory. People who have blogged or worked hard to get a following, whether on facebook, twitter, or on a blog, know what I am talking about. You can put tens of hours into a post, but if no one reads it or engages with it, you feel like a complete failure. It's like the tree that fell in the forest, did it make a sound if no one heard it? That's the same with a blog-post, did it really mean anything if no one read it?

Around this time, we had a particularly bold blogger, “Ali Eteraz”, an excellent writer, but with a habit of writing what I found terribly offensive. I still remember one of his post's titles, “How to Denude a Niqabi,” I think.  I could not stand for this nonsense and eventually got banned on his site! In retrospect though, I think he had a lot of depth to offer, and he had his own style of doing so. Also around this time altmuslim was doing remarkably well and I felt that someone had to stand up to these “proggies”.  Who would have guessed that only a few years later, I would write a piece for altmuslim, and be friends with Shahed Amanullah!

The lessons I have learned are simple yet so profound – people make contributions towards the purification of the ummah in different ways and with different styles. In general, the vast majority of Muslims who are doing Islam's work are sincere, even if they make mistakes. So, I now tell new internet cowboys to chill out and get to know others before jumping to conclusions.

Back to early 2007 then…

On the one hand, I had a driving force to “fight those soiling Islam”, and on the other, just a plain desire to raise the voice of the Islam that I knew and practiced, and fill what I believed was a big void in the blogosphere.

After a few months of struggling with bringing people to my blog, and noting the tendency of readers to jump from one blog to another, the solution seemed obvious: Bring together the various voices of Islam, mostly like-minded, under one umbrella and add a cornerstone Shaykh.

With this mission in mind, I contacted my college-mate, friend, and Shaykh, Yasir Qadhi, who was quick to latch on to the idea. Shaykh sahib (as I fondly call him) did not want his own site because he felt uncomfortable with the idea of a yasirqadhi.com site. He did not want something that he had to carry by himself. He was looking to be part of  a website that provided him an official platform but not something that was “his 100%”. Also, interestingly, this is the first time many of you may have heard this, he thought that I should NOT be part of it! He told me frankly that I could be divisive and hard-nosed and that it may affect the overall site, including him. And to be quite honest, he was not wrong about the “old Amad”.  However, after some thoughts and prayers, the website needed a driving force, someone who took personal ownership, and wrongly or rightly, that someone became me.

Having secured Shaykh Yasir's okay, I proceeded to collect a diverse, “A-team”. To be honest, I don't quite recall the order of how all this happened, but that is not really relevant anyway. There was “lotaenterprises” run by Omar, or otherwise fondly known as ibnabeeomar. Lotaenterprises was charming, witty and had the right sort of “which-shaykhs-does-he-follow pedigree”, so an obvious choice.

Then there was a young 15 or 16-year old sister in Canada, who I had recently discovered with an eerily similar named blog to mine, “Musings of a Muslim Mouse”. She called herself “AnonyMouse”. This teenager remained anonymous for many years, until she revealed her identity as Zainab. You will be surprised to know how many stalkers an anonymous voice can have; the curiosity of who this anonymous sister was led to Zainab's author profile of “AnonyMouse” getting the second highest hits after Shaykh Yasir's. Thanks to all the freaks out there!

From local connections in Houston, I knew of Ruth Nasrullah, a convert to Islam who was trained in journalism, which would help the professionalism of our site. And finally we had Sam Zamanian, or Ahmad al-Farsi (many still don't know what his official name is), an Iranian-origin convert to Islam, who was studying at MIT at the time.

Once we got the team's initial okays, we started having an email conversation about the new blog. What to name it? But more importantly what its purpose was. And some would say that they still don't quite clearly know MM's purpose, but sometimes vague visions can lead to fantastic goals because they permit a lot of flexibility and malleability.

The question of “why this blog” was never fully answered. We went in circles and the only clear idea we could all agree upon was that we needed a voice for “mainstream”, “average” Muslims on the blogosphere. We also agreed that a group blog would provide much more exposure and many more readers than individual efforts. Having Shaykh Yasir's name attached to the blog would give it credibility and take it off quicker than any of us individually could expect.

The naming of the blog was harder. There was “saheefa.com” and a variety of other names. I also remember seeing a website “othermatters” or something to that effect, and “matters” rang a bell. We wanted a name that would immediately mean something in English. Something easy to remember and neutral. And so we landed on MuslimMatters.org and the rest is history.

In order to beef up our Islamic scholarship and get some popular names on-board, I contacted Shaykh Tawfique Chowdhury, someone I had the pleasure of doing hajj with when he was still a young student at University of Madinah. Additionally, we got Abu Bakr on-board, a friend of Omar, and someone who was already writing Islamic material at islamicsciences website. Finally, we got a nod from Muslim intellectual Amir Butler from Australia. For the most part, most of these personalities did not quite latch on to MuslimMatters and only one still remains nominally with us.

On March 10, 2007, I announced that I was to stop writing on my personal blog and jump on to MuslimMatters. You can still see this posting here. And the rest, as they say, is history :)

He has had a very difficult day with a lot of questions echoing in his head, but he did not complain to anybody, as he knows there is only One who can assist him. The One who ordered him to seek assistance through prayer and patience, so here he is, seeking assistance through prayer, while many others sleep.

He raises his hands above his shoulders and proclaims the greatness of his Creator “Allāhu Akbar!”, then folds them on his chest. Quietly, he seeks protection from the accursed Satan, and begins in the name of his Lord. He recites The Opening Chapter in beautiful rhythmic tones. He takes his time, knowing that after every verse, his Lord replies. “All praise is for Allāh, the Lord of the Worlds,” he begins. He can feel the response within him, “My slave has praised me!”

“Most Gracious, Most Merciful,” he continues. “My slave has glorified me!” is the response. “Master of the Day of Judgment,” he affirms. “My slave has related all matters to me,” Allāh responds. “You alone we worship and You alone we ask for help,” he attests. Allāh's reply fills his heart with hope and joy, “This is between me and my servant and my servant will have whatever he asks for!”

At this point, he breaks down into tears as he asks Allāh for the most important thing in his life, “Guide us to the straight path, the path of those who have earned your favor, not of those who have earned your anger or have gone astray!” He feels peace as he internalizes Allāh's response, “This is for my slave and my slave will have what he asked for.”

He then recites further and feels Allāh's guidance in every verse he recites. For whichever chapter of the Qurʾān he chooses to recite from, he is assured that he will find guidance as Allāh has testified, “this is the book in which there is no doubt, it is a guidance for those who are conscious of Allāh.” After completing his emotional recitation in which he pondered over Allāh's wise and reassuring words, he bows in rukū' and glorifies his Lord for His guidance and mercy.

He then stands up straight and praises Allāh as he prepares for his favorite part of the prayer: the sajdah! He proclaims the greatness of Allāh and goes straight down into prostration, indicating his full submission to his Creator. It is a position which signifies complete obedience and humility and it is the position in which a person is closest to their Lord.

He stays in sajdah for a long time with no intention of getting up soon. He glorifies his Lord, The Most High, multiple times then breaks down into tears and begins to ask for everything he needs. He stays like this for several minutes with only Allāh knowing what he is saying. He is praying; praying for everything he needs, praying for everyone he knows, praying for people he doesn't know, praying for people who might even hate or harm him. He prays and prays, in complete submission to his Lord.

He then sits up to take a short break and seeks forgiveness for any shortcomings in his prayer, then goes back into prostration to glorify His Lord more and ask Him again for His endless bounties. After a few minutes, he stands up and repeats the entire cycle again.

Several minutes later, the humble slave returns to his bed at peace with his Lord, and at peace with creation. He recites his dua before sleeping and closes his eyes for a short nap, ready to tackle the challenges of life in the morning with full faith in his Lord.

This is ṣalāh, true ṣalāh. Ṣalāh based upon understanding, concentration, sincerity and submission. It was never meant to be a ritual, but rather a means of communication with our Creator and spiritual revival. May Allāh grant us all the ability, guidance and commitment to pray like this every day in all our prayers.